E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S :

Ending the Hidden
Punishment of Food
in Prison

- >..I
' ~

1

-"l

(
(

A report in six parts exploring the quality and
consequences of food in America’s prisons.
Produced by IMPACT/.,usrtCE

'

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

About Impact Justice

As a national nonprofit innovation and research center, Impact
Justice’s mission is to foster a more humane, responsive,
and restorative system of justice by preventing systems
entrenchment, eliminating cruel and inhumane confinement
conditions, and reducing barriers to societal reentry so that all
people can live productive and fulfilling lives. Our work seeks
to dismantle the prejudicial and discriminatory policies and
practices in our justice system through a unique combination of
research, pilot projects, evaluation, replication, advocacy, and
education.

About the Food in
Prison Project

The Food in Prison Project uses research, data, and the
experiences of individuals and loved ones who have been
impacted by incarceration to frame a national dialogue and
foster collaboration among a wide array of groups in order to
bring about comprehensive and transformative change to the
food and the experience of food in America’s prisons.

Authors

Leslie Soble, Research Fellow
Kathryn Stroud, Research Analyst
Marika Weinstein, Program Manager

IMPACT/.,usr,cE

To cite this report: Soble, L., Stroud, K., & Weinstein, M. (2020).
Eating Behind Bars: Ending the Hidden Punishment of Food in Prison.
Impact Justice. impactjustice.org/impact/food-in-prison/#report

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

Food in Prison Project
Advisory Board

José Andrés
Chef/Owner, ThinkFoodGroup
Founder, World Central Kitchen
Beatriz Beckford
Co-Founder of National Black
Food and Justice Alliance
National Director of
MomsRising.org
Lupa Brandt
Community Outreach Coordinator
at TRANScending Barriers Atlanta
Baz Dreisinger
Professor at John Jay College of
Criminal Justice
Executive Director of the
Incarceration Nations Network
Founder of the Prison-to-College
Pipeline
Dan Giusti
Founder and CEO of Brigaid

Kenneth E. Hartman
Author & Prison Reform Activist
Jennifer Kaplan
Food Writer
Instructor at the Culinary Institute
of America-Greystone
Sam Lewis
Executive Director of the AntiRecidivism Coalition
Adrienne Markworth
Executive Director of Leah’s
Pantry
Katherine Miller
Founding Executive Director of
the Chef Action Network
Puzzle Nesbitt
Program Associate for Criminal
Justice Initiatives
at Borealis Philanthropy

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

Acknowledgements

Contributions

We would like to extend our sincere gratitude to the many
individuals who contributed to this report, either directly or
indirectly. In particular, we want to thank the incarcerated and
formerly incarcerated individuals who shared their stories and
insights with us, creating the foundation for this report. The
depth this investigation reached would also not have been
possible without the corrections officials who gave us their
time, expertise, and access — we appreciate their willingness
to engage with us. Thank you to the many experts in a wide
variety of fields who helped deepen our understanding of the
many intersections prison food has with different disciplines
and sectors, including Lucy Flores from FoodCorps and Amanda
Berger from Insight Garden Program. We are also grateful to
numerous Impact Justice staff members, our Food in Prison
Project advisory board, and the amazing professionals listed
below who supported this investigation and report. Finally, we
want to provide a special thanks for the support and time we
received from Mark McBrine, Kanav Kathuria, and Lois Fegan.

Study design

Illustrations

Umbreen Bhatti

Melissa Garden

Editor

Graphic design

Jennifer Trone

Elefint Designs

Copy editor

Media outreach

Christopher Cook

The Outcast Agency

Table of Contents

-

PART 1

PART 2

PART 3

PART 4

PART 5

PART 6

Executive Summary

06

Introduction

14

Food On a Tray

22

When Food Harms

29

From the Chow Hall to “Home Cooking” in Prison

54

The Prison Food Machine

69

Who’s Looking? Who’s Listening?

93

A vivid portrait of mealtime in prison, characterized by food that is
unappetizing, poor in quality, and sometimes unsafe

An up-close look at the nutritional value and quantity of food served in prison,
exploring the relationship between diet and physical and mental health for
incarcerated people

A deeper look at the physical environments where prison meals take place
and their effects on the health and well-being of incarcerated people

A map of the operational landscape — the state-level policies and food
service practices inside prisons that determine the quality of food in prison

A study of the systems and avenues that should function to hold
departments of correction accountable for the quality of food in prison

A Path Forward

107

A framework of key insights to encourage and guide change toward a more
positive and nourishing eating experience in prison

Endnotes

126

Methodology

133

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

6

Executive Summary
Good food nourishes and sustains the body—
and does more than that. What we cook and eat
affirms who we are as individuals and connects
us to people, places, and cultures. Yet a positive
relationship with food—an essential part of being
human—is denied every day to incarcerated
people when the food made available to them
functions as another form of punishment.
A person sentenced to prison in the United States serves three
years on average. That’s more than 3,000 meals behind bars (far
more for people serving longer sentences), all typically high
in salt, sugar, and refined carbohydrates and low in essential
nutrients—a diet that for decades everyone else has been
advised to avoid. The food itself and the conditions under which
it is served are harmful to physical and mental health and can
erode self-esteem, with immediate and long-term impacts.

Prisons function as outof-sight food deserts,
perpetuating patterns
of poor health in
communities that already
experience profound
inequities.

The damaging and degrading prison food experience is a
symptom of a larger systemic malady: our dependence on a
dehumanizing criminal justice system to address harm. Like
every other aspect of mass incarceration, this is an issue of racial
and economic injustice: Lower-income communities of color,
where affordable healthy food is scarce, disproportionately lose
members to prison and then struggle to support them when they
return home in worse health. In this way, prisons function as
out-of-sight food deserts, perpetuating patterns of poor health
in communities that already experience profound inequities.
This six-part report, the first national investigation of its kind,
explores these and other troubling trends in prison food.
Resulting from 18 months of fact-finding by Impact Justice,
our report centers the perspectives of people who have been
incarcerated while also examining food service policies and
practices that affect 1.3 million people incarcerated in state
prisons nationwide. The report also highlights some promising

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

7

Impact Justice
national assessment

250

surveys from
formerly
incarcerated
people in 41 states

230

surveys from
friends and
family members
of incarcerated
people

11

in-depth
interviews
with formerly
incarcerated
people

43

interviews with
current and former
corrections staff in
12 states

50

state policies
reviewed
& 35 state
agencies surveyed

emerging efforts in a handful of prisons where nourishing food is
becoming a priority, illuminating the potential for change.
The broadening awareness that access to good food is a
fundamental human right has spawned urban farms, mobile
farmers’ markets, and land co-ops, revitalized school lunch,
and more. This report makes clear that the growing food justice
movement must incorporate the millions of people inside prison
walls, and shows how diverse stakeholders can work together in
common purpose.

Key takeaways
Key takeaway

01

The current system has unacceptably low
standards that sacrifice people’s health for the
lowest cost and highest efficiency.
With a staggering number of incarcerated people to feed, states
now spend far less per person—under $3 a day in the majority of
states and as little as $1.02 in one state—leading to nationwide
patterns of unacceptable and declining food quality. Cuts or
stagnant spending in what already comprises a minuscule
portion of a prison system’s overall budget (e.g., just 4% in

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

8

Texas in 2019) have led to fewer hot meals, smaller portions,
lower-quality protein, and more ultra-processed foods that can
be quickly heated and served; along with poorly equipped and
ill-supervised kitchens that further compromise food quality
and safety. Fresh fruits and vegetables—central to a healthy diet
rich in nutrients and fiber—are exceedingly rare in prison. Most
prisons now rely on refined carbohydrates (e.g., white bread,
biscuits, and cake) to reach the mandated calorie count, and
many have turned to fortified powdered beverage mixes as the
primary source of essential nutrients—a cheap but woefully
inadequate alternative to nutrient-dense whole foods.

A scarcity of fresh
produce

62.2%

11.3%

rarely/never

Impact Justice (2020).

always/often

I had access
to fresh
vegetables

“Over the last two decades
I’ve witnessed a weight
gain in the offender
population and more
offenders become insulin
dependent,” one officer
wrote to us.

54.8%

15.9%

rarely/never

always/often

26.5%

23.3%

sometimes

sometimes

I had access
to fresh
fruits

The consequences of these prison practices are clear. Research
shows that just one month of unhealthy meals can result in
long-term rises in cholesterol and body fat, increasing the risk
of diet-related diseases. A recent report from the federal Bureau
of Justice Statistics found that incarcerated people suffer from
higher rates of diabetes and heart disease than the general
public, conditions caused or at minimum exacerbated by the
typical prison diet. A poor diet also suppresses the immune
system, making incarcerated people even more vulnerable to
viruses such as COVID-19 and other contagions. Along with
declines in physical health, nutrient deficiencies contribute to
a wide range of mental health and behavioral issues, including
depression, aggression, and antisocial behavior. Given that 95%
of incarcerated people are eventually released, their physical and
mental health is ultimately a community and societal concern.

94%

9

91%
agree

89%
agree

Meals looked
unappetizing

9%
disagree

Served mostly food that doesn’t function as food should—taste
good and nourish the body and mind—nearly everyone we
surveyed said they couldn’t get enough to eat in prison. One
person described a “constant hunger gnawing at you.” Another
mentioned “hanger,” the anger that results from being denied
food.

Meals did not
taste good

disagree

11%

Humans are hard-wired and acculturated to imbue food with
meaning far beyond survival; we use food to communicate our
relationships and values. Most food served in prison sends a
clear message that the people eating it don’t matter. Not only is
the food generally unappetizing, it’s also a source of disgust and
humiliation—three out of four formerly incarcerated people we
surveyed reported receiving trays with spoiled food (e.g., moldy
bread, sour milk, rotten meat, slimy bagged salad mix, and
canned or packaged products years past their expiration date).
Numerous formerly incarcerated people who were assigned to
work in their prison’s kitchen recalled being required to cook
and serve packages of chicken and beef marked “not for human
consumption.”

l

of survey respondents
reported that they did
not have enough food
to feel full

Impact Justice (2020).

Unappealing to
the senses

02

Incarcerated people are routinely humiliated
by the experience of eating in prison, with both
immediate and long-term consequences.

Key takeaway

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

l

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

“It always felt like feeding
us was more like a duty.
They don’t care if people
are really nourished. That
affects you mentally.”
— Natalia, who served time on the East Coast

10

The prison eating environment matters as well. Chow halls
are frequently described as bleak, stressful, and potentially
dangerous places where mealtime is a regimented, impersonal,
and rushed affair. Formerly incarcerated people also described
the shame of eating in front of officers who view them with
contempt, a dynamic that caused some to skip meals. Some of the
worst chow halls are also unsanitary (e.g., visible mold on walls,
swarms of insects, and odors of “something rotten and dying”).
Science is beginning to reveal the deeper effects of eating
in such an unpleasant environment. For example, lack of
natural light and high noise levels negatively affect how the
body processes food, with both immediate and long-term
consequences for physical and mental health. Several formerly
incarcerated people we surveyed described their struggle,
both in prison and after release, to maintain a healthy weight,
functioning body, and positive relationship with food.

Key takeaway

03
“Food brings people
together … When
someone is sick, you want
to bring them soup; when
someone is sad you want
to bring them cake.”
— Alicia, formerly incarcerated on the West Coast

“Home cooking” in prison is an important form
of resistance within a dehumanizing system— but
most commissary offerings are unhealthy and
unaffordable.
The alternative to the tasteless (or worse) big-batch food
prepared in prison kitchens is meals that incarcerated people
make for themselves and others with supplies purchased at
the facility commissary. Many formerly incarcerated people
recall these “home-cooked” meals as some of the only positive
memories associated with food during their time in prison.
While cooking in prison with items purchased from the
commissary has gained attention as a form of creative resistance
to the depersonalization of prison, it doesn’t typically increase
access to healthy food. Food items sold by commissaries (such
as instant ramen soups or macaroni and cheese) are heavily

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

71%

of survey respondents
stated they had to do
things that were against
policy or rules to get
access to more food

11

processed, typically high in sodium, sugar, refined carbs, and
unhealthy fats—and they’re expensive. Three in five formerly
incarcerated people we surveyed said they could not afford
commissary purchases, and many people are forced to choose
between buying food and purchasing necessities such as
toothpaste or making costly phone calls to loved ones. We
heard stories about people going to great lengths, including
engaging in gang activity or sexual relationships, to gain access to
commissary food because they were so hungry. We also learned
that food inequities in prison mirror those on the outside, with
people from low-income backgrounds (often people of color) less
likely to have the finances to afford commissary items.

Key takeaway

04
75%

of survey respondents
stated that they had
been served rotten or
spoiled food

Greater transparency and accountability are
essential.
Unlike commercial and other large-scale kitchens, prison food
facilities are not routinely subject to rigorous independent
oversight—and the results of inspections that do occur are rarely
shared with the public. In our interviews, formerly incarcerated
people recalled kitchens that lacked even soap and hot water,
had roaches crawling out of the drains and rats scurrying across
the floor, and that routinely served spoiled food—except on
inspection days, when a quick clean-up to present a sanitary
kitchen and safe food-handling took place. It’s no surprise that
incarcerated people are six times more likely than the general
public to become sickened by foodborne illness. For those who
wish to express discontent, typically the only avenue is the
grievance process, which can be complex, time-consuming, and
ultimately futile.
Perhaps the most salient example of poor oversight is the
widespread use of food as a disciplinary tool. We spoke with
a number of leaders and frontline staff in the corrections
profession who assured us that food is not and should never be

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

“The food there was
designed to slowly break
your body and mind.”
— a formerly incarcerated person

12

used as a form of punishment—yet formerly incarcerated people
shared many accounts suggesting that the age-old practice of
punishing people by withholding food or serving disgusting or
inedible food persists in many prisons. This is especially true for
those placed in segregated housing as a disciplinary measure:
At least 36 states require or allow the use of an alternative
meal as a disciplinary measure, including at least 18 states that
permit the use of nutraloaf, a purposely unappetizing mash of
incompatible foods baked into a loaf and served in slices.

Key takeaway

05

The food available to people in prison could
promote rehabilitation and support successful
reentry—and that requires a new approach to food
service that’s grounded in dignity and health.
There are obvious benefits to rethinking and dramatically
improving the experience of eating in prison. Addressing
nutritional deficiencies, satiating hunger, nourishing the senses,
and restoring human agency by giving incarcerated people
some choice in what they eat can profoundly improve physical
and mental health. This will help people prepare to become
fully engaged parents, family members, neighbors, and work
colleagues after their release. These outcomes could very well
spur larger improvements in public health and public safety,
strengthening entire communities.
There are benefits for correctional agencies as well. Improving
prison food can lead to safer facilities and less spending on
diet-related illnesses and diseases. There’s also evidence that
agencies can make meaningful improvements in food quality
and the eating experience while controlling their spending.
Adopting creative local purchasing agreements, partnering with
allied institutions and movements, and adapting strategies that
have succeeded in other sectors (e.g., hospitals and schools)
are all promising pathways to change. Also important: prison

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

13

officials should seek out and seriously consider the views and
suggestions of incarcerated people, a process that itself would
improve the culture in facilities.
While Impact Justice works toward a justice system that does
not use incarceration as its answer to every problem and that
instead relies more on community-based restorative justice
models, we recognize that the people who are locked up today
deserve to be treated with dignity now—and that includes access
to nourishing food.

Promising
practices
These are just a few of
the promising practices
highlighted throughout
Eating Behind Bars:

0

At Mountain View Correctional Facility in Charleston, Maine,
large onsite gardens and a 7-acre apple orchard provide fresh
produce that goes directly to the facility kitchen for use in meals.
Additionally, facility food service manager Mark McBrine has
established partnerships with local producers to source highquality meat, dairy, and whole-grain flour, as well as more
fresh vegetables—a win-win for the prison and the local farming
economy.

0
0

Las Colinas Detention and Reentry Facility in Santee, California,
provides a dining hall replete with natural light, soft earth
tones, and normal chairs and tables. Updated in 2014 by a local
architecture firm, the redesign has positively affected the facility
atmosphere, with both residents and staff reporting less stress
during meals.
In September 2019, Noble Correctional Institution in Caldwell,
Ohio, piloted a visitation cookout where the families of a handful
of incarcerated men were invited to join their loved ones to grill,
eat, and clean up. Pleased with the success of the inaugural lunch,
department leaders hope to repeat and expand the initiative.

I
I
I
I
I
I
I

INTRO
PART 1
PART 2
PART 3
PART 4
PART 5
PART 6

INTRODUCTION

Eating Behind Bars
“I can’t express enough how much people are aware of the terrible
food they are exposed to and how much that awareness takes a
toll on their mental and emotional health. It is depressing...brings
down morale, increases stress, and leaves people hopeless.”
- loved one of someone who is incarcerated

It’s well known that good food nourishes and sustains the body, and does more than
that. We look to food for pleasure and comfort. What we cook and eat affirms who we
are as individuals and as members of families and cultures. Through shared meals,
food connects us, expanding and strengthening the web of relationships on which
we depend; there is a reason people have been breaking bread together for ages.
Preparing a meal or enjoying one that someone else has cooked is part of being human.
Yet a positive relationship with food, so elemental to the human condition and vital to
health, is denied every day to people in prison.

I N T R O | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

The idea that
nourishing food should
be available to everyone
as a fundamental
human right has been
gaining traction in the
United States over the
past decade.

15

Impact Justice’s multi-part report, Eating Behind Bars: Ending
the Hidden Punishment of Food in Prison, is the first national
look at food in prison of its kind. In six installments released over
the course of a week, we explore troubling and harmful trends
in prison food through personal perspectives and recollections
that bring these issues to life. We examine why and how food,
which should nurture life, has become yet another means of
denigrating incarcerated people. We discover what’s at stake—for
them, the communities they return to, and ultimately all of us.
We also identify policies and practices that must change, and
in that context, what we can learn from select prisons around
the country where nourishing food is becoming more of a
priority, and on better days a reality. We hope this report sparks
a national dialogue about the role of food in our justice system
and illuminates how better food can support goals everyone can
agree on: creating safer and healthier communities, spending
less on health care in the long run, and treating all people as
human beings.
The idea that nourishing food should be available to everyone
as a fundamental human right has been gaining traction in the
United States over the past decade. From urban farms and
mobile farmers’ markets to land co-ops and the revitalization
of school lunch, new initiatives are cropping up across the
country. There is still much work to do, however, and the
glaring discrepancies in access to nourishing food have become
especially visible amid COVID-19.

0
While we use the term “food desert”
here in consistency with the existing
research, this designation does not
capture the fact that access to food
is the result of systems designed by
people. “Food desert” implies a natural
phenomenon and removes agency.
The term “food apartheid,” preferred
by many food justice advocates, more
precisely describes the systemic racism
and underlying causes of inequity that
permeate our food system.

The growing commitments to provide healthy food to everyone
and to end excessive punishment overlap, in large part because
the stakes in both of these areas are highest for Black and
brown Americans. It is in lower-income communities of color
where affordable healthy food is least available, and these
same communities disproportionately lose members to mass
incarceration and then are challenged to support them when
they exit a harmful prison environment. Prisons function as
out-of-sight food deserts, perpetuating patterns of ill health
amongst populations that already experience profound
inequities.1

I N T R O | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

16

RACIAL DISPARITIES
Black Americans are incarcerated at
five times the rate of white Americans,
and the rates are three and two times
as high for Native Americans and
Latino/a people respectively (though
the data is known to be insufficient
on this front). The U.S. justice system
has a specific, historically rooted anti-

A clear picture of mealtime in prison emerged from our surveys
and interviews with scores of formerly incarcerated people,
and from many corrections officials as well: the substandard
quality of food in most prisons and the typically harsh conditions
under which it’s served are neither physically nourishing nor
life-affirming. Indeed, the experience of eating in prison is one
of the most common yet virtually unexamined ways that prison
routinely treats people as less than human.

Black bias.

38%

of state prisoners are Black,
compared with 13% of the full
US population

1 in 9

Black children have a
parent behind bars

52%

is the probability that a
low-income Black man has
been incarcerated
Source: Gramlick, J. (2020). Black
imprisonment rate in the U.S. has fallen by
a third since 2006. Pew Research Center.
Link here
Nellis, A. (2016). The Color of Justice:
Racial and Ethnic Disparity in State
Prisons. The Sentencing Project. Link here

That food has become another form of daily punishment is a
casualty of mass incarceration. There is no bygone golden
age of prison food, but with a skyrocketing number of people
to feed—from half a million people incarcerated in 1980 to 2.3
million behind bars in prisons and jails two decades later—the
quality of the food has sunk to new lows.2 With only a few
notable exceptions, our investigation found that a nationwide
pattern of poor and declining quality has continued unabated.
Budget cuts and stagnant spending have led to fewer hot meals,
smaller portions, lower-quality protein, fewer fresh fruits and
vegetables, and more ultra-processed foods, as well as poorly
equipped and ill-supervised kitchens that further compromise
quality. And although the media have revealed appalling
conditions in prisons operated by corporations like CoreCivic
and the GEO Group, the problem runs much deeper than
privatization.
A person sentenced to prison in the United States serves three
years on average—that’s more than 3,000 meals behind bars—
and hundreds of thousands of people are incarcerated for
much longer periods of time.3 All the while, they are consuming
meals high in salt, sugar, and refined carbohydrates and low in
essential nutrients. People in prison are fed a diet that everyone
else has been advised for decades to avoid for health reasons.
Research shows that just one month of unhealthy meals can
result in long-term rises in cholesterol and body fat, increasing
the risk of diet-related diseases.4 An unhealthy diet also
suppresses the immune system, making incarcerated people

I N T R O | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

17

LENGTHY SENTENCES
While many people cycle through the
prison system on short sentences,
hundreds of thousands of people
spend decades in prison. In many
cases, prison food will be the main
source of someone’s nutrition for the

more vulnerable to viruses, including COVID-19 and other
contagions.5 Along with declines in physical health, nutrient
deficiencies contribute to a wide range of mental health and
behavioral issues.6 In this way, the poor quality of breakfast,
lunch, and dinner, day after day, profoundly influences the
overall environment and safety of a facility.

majority of their life.

1 in 7

people in prison are
serving life or “virtual life”
(50 years or more)

38%

is the average increase in
sentence length between
1992 and 2016 for violent
offenses (that’s an additional
3,066 meals per person)

56%

of people sentenced before
the age of 25 and serving the
longest sentences are Black
Source: Nellis, A. & Anderson, C. (2017).
Still Life: America’s Increasing Use of
Life and Long-Term Sentences. The
Sentencing Project. Link here
Courtney, L., et al. (2017). A Matter of
Time: The Causes and Consequences of
Rising Time Served in America’s Prisons.
Urban Institute. Link here

While some people enter prison in far less than optimal health,
the food they consume while incarcerated practically ensures
they will leave prison even less healthy, while those who begin
their sentence in better shape are likely to deteriorate. Given
that 95% of incarcerated people are eventually released, their
physical and mental health is ultimately a community and
societal concern.7
This Introduction, along with “Part 1: Food On a Tray,” is the
first installment of Eating Behind Bars: Ending the Hidden
Punishment of Food in Prison. This report series is the product of
18 months of fact-finding, focused on the state prison systems
in which over half of America’s incarcerated people are held. We
began by thoroughly reviewing the small body of prior research
and other scholarly literature, food-related litigation, and media
reports. We then conducted our own investigation to fill in the
significant gaps, beginning with learning about the experiences
of those most impacted: currently and formerly incarcerated
people and their loved ones, whose input is vital to any
discussion on the topic. In addition to surveys and interviews,
we conducted focus groups with currently incarcerated people
in two facilities and spoke informally with incarcerated people at
the facilities we visited, noted below.
We also wanted to understand the operational realities of
serving food in prison. We completed a systematic review
of food-related policies and practices in all 50 states by
analyzing publicly available information and surveying state
correctional departments to fill in gaps, as well as interviewing
43 corrections professionals. We also observed food service
operations ourselves by visiting prisons in California, Maine,

I N T R O | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

18

The reach of
mass incarceration
The millions of meals being fed to people in U.S. prisons each year do not just impact those who
are eating them. The huge number of people who have been cycled through the system and their
family members experience the impacts in ongoing or indirect ways.

1 in 3

ADULTS IN THE U.S. HAS AN IMMEDIATE FAMILY MEMBER
WHO HAS BEEN TO PRISON OR JAIL

5.7 million

kids under age 18
have experienced the
incarceration of a parent

4.9 million

formerly incarcerated
people have spent time in
a state or federal prison

2.3 million

people are currently
incarcerated in federal
prisons, state prisons,
and local jails

Source:Sawyer, W. (2020). “Mass Incarceration: The Whole Pie.” Prsion Policy Initiative. Link here
Gotsch, K. (2018). “Families and Mass Incarceration.” The Sentencing Project. Link here

I N T R O | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

19

Impact Justice
national assessment

• • ••• 230
•••••••
••
•••••••••••
••••••••••
••••••••
•••••
• • •
43

surveys from friends
and family members of
incarcerated people

250

surveys from formerly
incarcerated people in
41 states

interviews with
current and former
corrections staff in
12 states

11

in-depth interviews
with formerly
incarcerated people

50

state policies reviewed
& 35 state agencies
surveyed

Virginia, and Washington. We would have visited prisons in
other states had our requests been granted. In that regard, it’s
important to note that our efforts to understand and document
the state of prison food nationwide reinforce that the majority
of correctional agencies still operate as opaque institutions. In
addition, because each state runs its own autonomous prison
system, drawing comparisons across states is fraught with
challenges and limitations.
Our deep dive into the unique experience of eating in prison is
complemented by our study of nutrition, the role of food from a
social and cultural perspective, and the growing food justice and
racial justice movements. More information on our investigation
is available in the Methodology. While the exploration phase of
this project ended before the current public health crisis, we
continued to monitor the media for articles through August 2020
to learn how the COVID-19 pandemic is affecting food in prison,
information that we’ve incorporated in brief.

I N T R O | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

Better food can
support rehabilitation
and improve facility
atmospheres, ultimately
reducing recidivism and
increasing community
safety both inside and
outside prison walls.

20

During the course of our work, we met corrections officials
whose level of concern about the poor quality of food in prison
matches our own. Most food service managers are trying
to do the best they can with limited resources and working
within deeply entrenched systems. We also encountered a few
leaders who are challenging the status quo in the facilities and
systems they oversee. Because our goal all along was to do
more than just document the problem, we highlight promising
practices throughout the report as hopeful counterpoints to the
predominantly disturbing trends. We hope this report inspires
corrections leadership and staff to leverage the power of food
to support rehabilitation and improve facility atmospheres,
ultimately reducing recidivism and increasing community safety
both inside and outside prison walls.
The damaging and degrading prison food experience is a
symptom of a larger systemic malady: our dependence on a
dehumanizing criminal justice system to address harm. While
Impact Justice dreams of a justice system that does not use
incarceration as its answer to every problem and instead relies
on community-based restorative justice models, we recognize
that people locked up today deserve to be treated with dignity
now—and that includes having access to nourishing food.
There are changes that can and should be made immediately,
even as we work to dismantle the structures that drive mass
incarceration. Our own work does not conclude with this report;
we plan to use what we have learned to drive meaningful
changes in food-related policies and practices in correctional
facilities nationwide. We invite advocates working in any
number of intersecting movements—racial justice, food justice,
environmental justice, and justice system reform
—to join us in this undertaking.
Food in prison can be a powerful tool for restoring health,
cultivating self-esteem, and nurturing people’s potential.
Whatever hats you wear as a reader of this report—corrections
staff, advocate, formerly or currently incarcerated person,
policymaker, family member, journalist, researcher, concerned

I N T R O | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

21

POINTS OF INTERVENTION
Our investigation turned up a number
of points at which interventions could
occur. Throughout the report, you will
see icons to signal promising practices
or ideas in the field that pertain to

citizen—we hope this series brings fresh insight and urgency to
a long-overlooked and particularly degrading aspect of life in
prison. Unhealthy and unsafe prison food harms people while
they are incarcerated and potentially for the rest of their lives,
with ripple effects that impact us all.

these points of intervention:
Procurement

NEXT UP
PART 1: FOOD ON A TR AY

Menu planning &
meal preparation
Eating environment
Commissary

(QJ

Visitation

[lJ

Education & awareness

~

Programming

Reentry

Oversight & feedback

In the first installment, we provide a vivid portrait of mealtime
in prison, characterized by food that is unappetizing, poor in
quality, and sometimes unsafe.

I
I
I
I
I
I
I

INTRO
PART 1
PART 2
PART 3
PART 4
PART 5
PART 6

PART 1

Food on a Tray
“Food in prison sucks. Period.”
— formerly incarcerated person

Theo, who was incarcerated in a Northwestern state prison, still remembers the time
they served boiled cabbage every day for a month. Across the country, Nate recalls a
friend sighing as he sat down to his “four-hundred-somethingth” spaghetti dinner in
their Northeastern facility.
Like every other aspect of life in prison, the food is dreary and monotonous and, with
rare exceptions, relentlessly bad: two slimy pieces of bologna sandwiched between
flimsy slices of white bread, a packet of mustard, and a handful of potato chips one
day; two boiled hot dogs, the same white bread, and a scoop of under-baked beans
the next. There are concoctions too similar to differentiate, in which chunks of mystery
meat swim in a dull gravy, sometimes atop mushy white rice, and as Nate’s friend
experienced, a clump of pasta with the same watery tomato sauce week after week.
Served on a tray and posing as spaghetti, stew, or a sandwich, the food in prison bears
little resemblance in color, aroma, taste, and texture to real food—food that people
crave because it’s actually nourishing.
“There is no one here who would eat this [food] three times a day by choice or feed it to
their family on the outside,” Joshua told us, summing up the general sentiment among
people who have lived in prison. Another person put it more bluntly: “Food in prison
sucks. Period.”

P A R T 1 | F O O D O N A T R AY

23

From unappetizing to inedible
While many correctional facilities prepare special bettertasting meals on holidays—turkey and mashed potatoes on
Thanksgiving, hamburgers and watermelon on the Fourth of
July—the everyday fare tends to range from bland to awful. More
than 80% of the 250 formerly incarcerated people we surveyed
report that the food they were served was unappetizing in taste
and smell. When asked to describe the food in their own words,
one person we surveyed wrote, a “nasty, mushy, goulashtype mixture”; another recalled “rubbery, chewy, slop on a
plate.” While a few formerly incarcerated people told us they
encountered food that was “not great but edible enough,” or “not
terrible,” the overwhelming sentiment was one of disgust. Even
corrections officers described the food as “monotonous,” “poor
quality and highly processed,” and “detrimental to the wellbeing of the inmate population.”
11%

Unappealing to
the senses

disagree

89%

Source: Impact Justice(2020).

28%

9%

disagree

91%

agree

Meals did not
taste good

agree

Meals looked
unappetizing

of survey respondents
agreed that foods
were served at the
appropriate temperature

All names of incarcerated and formerly
incarcerated people have been changed
to respect their privacy.

Even temperature can be an issue: Food that should be served
hot is lukewarm at best, while cold items such as milk may sit out
for hours before mealtime. The farther away from the kitchen
a meal is served, the less likely the food will arrive at the right
temperature. This can be a constant problem in prisons where
residents eat in their unit’s dayroom as opposed to in a central
dining hall, and when delivering meals to people confined to
their cell in a special housing unit. The result is food that’s even
less palatable and quite possibly spoiled.

P A R T 1 | F O O D O N A T R AY

t

A lunch of fried baloney, bread, lettuce,
and macaroni salad is offered in a South
Carolina prison in 2016
Source:The Post and Courier

Our surveys and
interviews document
accounts of weevils in
grits, rocks in turnip
greens, maggots in
meat, a rat tail buried
in one day’s entree, and
oatmeal ladled up with
human hair, pieces of
metal, or cockroaches.

24

Sometimes—and routinely in some facilities—the food provided
is far worse than unappetizing. In a 2018 survey of incarcerated
people conducted by the Incarcerated Workers Organizing
Committee, 66% of respondents reported that in the last year
they had been served food that contained bugs, was moldy
or spoiled, or that was not intended for humans.8 Our surveys
and interviews document accounts of weevils in grits, rocks in
turnip greens, maggots in meat, a rat tail buried in one day’s
entree, and oatmeal ladled up with human hair, pieces of metal,
or cockroaches. People describe water running brown from the
tap, which they naturally find repulsive and undrinkable. One
person noted that while staff are provided bottled water, brown
water from the tap is apparently good enough for people who
are incarcerated.
Our surveys include accounts of food prepared in ways that
render it inedible and in some instances unsafe: crunchy rice and
undercooked beans likely to cause gastrointestinal distress, and
chicken dangerously pink or so parched it’s like cardboard, for
example. Then there’s the practice of serving obviously spoiled
food, something that three out of four formerly incarcerated
people we surveyed had personally experienced. They list, for
example, moldy bread, sour milk, rotten meat, slimy bagged
salad mix, and canned or packaged products years past their

P A R T 1 | F O O D O N A T R AY

75%

of survey respondents said
they were served rotten
or spoiled food while they
were incarcerated

“The only time we’d
get chocolate milk was
when the milk was
spoiled and they’d add
chocolate flavor.”
— Rosa, incarcerated for 33 years

25

expiration date. Rosa served 33 years in a Southern prison
before being released in 2015. “The only time we’d get chocolate
milk was when the milk was spoiled and they’d add chocolate
flavor,” she recalled, so “you might get chunky chocolate milk.”
Kayla, who was pregnant during part of her two-year sentence
in another Southern state, remembers thinking, “I know I have
to eat to survive and stay as healthy as possible, but what do you
do when it’s not really edible?” Several corrections officers we
interviewed told us they have witnessed spoiled food served
to people in the facilities where they work. “Guys show me
expiration dates two years old on their meat products,” one
concerned officer informed us.
Numerous formerly incarcerated people who were assigned
to work in their prison’s kitchen recall being required to cook
and serve packages of chicken and beef marked “not for human
consumption,” and, in one case, to incorporate a soy-based dog
food filler—a practice discontinued only after someone stole
the label and filed a complaint. One incarcerated person wrote
to the Incarcerated Workers Organizing Committee, “It says on
the bags of hot cereal ‘not for human consumption’ and has the
picture of the head of a horse.”9 Such abuses have a long history.
Rosa remembers being served VitaPro, a substance intended as
cattle feed, in the 1990s. “Texas was being sued for serving it to
their inmates, but [our state] continued to serve it to us, and did
so until they got sued as well,” she told us.10 Another formerly
incarcerated person remembers seeing egg crates with “for
prison use only” stenciled on them, adding “it doesn’t do well for
the mind to see things like that.”

Drop-off in quality amid COVID-19
There is evidence that food quality in prisons plummeted
rapidly when COVID-19 began spreading inside correctional
facilities at the end of March 2020. Unsurprisingly, some of the
biggest outbreaks nationally have occurred in prisons due to
overcrowding and confined living spaces. Increased exposure

P A R T 1 | F O O D O N A T R AY

26

to the virus became an immediate concern as kitchen workers
exhibiting symptoms were told to continue preparing meals
while waiting for test results, and incarcerated people were still
gathering in crowded chow halls for meals even after stay-athome orders took effect.11
Instead of releasing enough people to enable some semblance
of social distancing as the pandemic grew, prisons in many
states reverted to lockdown, which included closing dining
halls. The strategy has done little to stem the spread of the
virus but makes it easier to operate facilities with fewer staff as
employees become infected and sick.12

One former Texas
prison official
explained that these
lockdown meals,
known as “johnny
sacks,” have always
been “subpar.” He
added: “They’re shitty.”

Both the quantity and quality of food have been compromised as
facilities struggle to manage the pandemic. In Ohio, meals were
reduced to two a day.13 Florida and Georgia replaced hot meals
with sandwiches and little else for both lunch and dinner.14
According to a report by the Marshall Project released in midMay and documented with photos, meals in the 40-plus Texas
state prisons had been arriving “in paper bags, cold, mushy and
without a hint of green (except perhaps for some iffy-looking hot
dogs).”15 One former Texas prison official explained that these
lockdown meals, known as “johnny sacks,” have always been
“subpar.” He added: “They’re shitty.” The bags reportedly were
delivered at odd hours: two boiled eggs and a peanut butter
sandwich at 3 a.m., according to one incarcerated person, and
then, 13 hours later, the next bag arrived with sloppy joes or
peanut butter sandwiches that were nearly indistinguishable. By
early May, people—including those who were sick—hadn’t eaten a
warm meal in weeks.
As of early June, according to Virginia Public Radio, several
prisons in the state were relying on “emergency menus,”
deployed when there isn’t enough staff to prepare regular
meals.16 One woman they interviewed said that her husband
“gets potato chips, moon pies and gummy candies, but apples
are often rotten, a fresh vegetable usually means a couple of
carrot or celery sticks.” Only a few main dishes, like hot dogs,

P A R T 1 | F O O D O N A T R AY

t

A sloppy joe and a hot dog are served to
a person incarcerated in Texas during
the COVID-19 pandemic
Source:The Marshall Project

One man in Texas
wrote to his daughter
in a letter she shared
with the Marshall
Project: “We will not
die by COVID19 but
we die by hunger!!
TRUTH!”

27

bologna sandwiches, or a fried processed chicken patty are
now served. Religious and medical diets are no longer being
respected, so a person with diabetes might be served pancakes
already covered with syrup, for example. The state says that the
modified meals still meet American Correctional Association
standards.
In some facilities, commissary access has been limited or
banned altogether, and shortages of popular items like ramen
noodles, which many rely on to stave off hunger, have left people
anxious about getting enough to eat.17 One man in Texas wrote
to his daughter in a letter she shared with the Marshall Project:
“We will not die by COVID19 but we die by hunger!! TRUTH!” The
situation has become so dire that food strikes have broken out in
Ohio and Massachusetts, and led to a riot in Arkansas.18 These
reports are especially disheartening given that tens of millions
of pounds of fresh food have gone to waste around the country
as producers have been unable to sell their goods to shut-down
restaurants and schools.19

More than mere survival
Humans are hard-wired and acculturated to imbue food
with meaning far beyond mere survival. Psychologically and
emotionally, people naturally connect food with places, events,
cherished memories, the common rhythms of life, and a sense of

P A R T 1 | F O O D O N A T R AY

28

belonging. Chicago is famous for deep-dish pizza, New Orleans
for gumbo, New Mexico for vibrant red and green chiles. For
many, drinking hot chocolate on a cold winter’s day or lighting
candles on a birthday cake is a cherished ritual. Homemade
bread warm from the oven may bring to mind a beloved
grandmother, and a popsicle fresh out of the freezer recalls
the endless summers of childhood. There’s a simmering pot of
black-eyed peas to mark the new year in many Southern homes,
the sizzle of Chanukah latkes frying in oil, the sticky sweetness
of dates to break the Ramadan fast, and the pillowy softness
of pan de muerto to welcome ancestral spirits on Día de los
Muertos. Across the country, there are innumerable variations
of chicken soup for the flu and comforting dishes after funerals.
There are pints of ice cream to soothe a broken heart and
steaming cups of coffee to greet a new day.

Most meals not
only taste bad, but
also send the clear
message that no one
cares and that the
people eating them
don’t matter.

Food blurs the boundaries between our biological, social,
and cultural selves; even simple food, if it tastes good and
is made with care, makes us feel whole. On March 18, 2020,
as the COVID-19 crisis took hold, Sam Sifton titled his daily
New York Times food column, “Deliciousness Matters.” In it,
he wrote, “deliciousness improves moods, and inspires hope.
Deliciousness sends a message. Someone cares.”
Food served to the 1.3 million people in state prisons across
America typically has the opposite effect. Most meals not only
taste bad, but also send the clear message that no one cares
and that the people eating them don’t matter. Alicia, who was
incarcerated for 15 years in West Coast facilities, summed it up
well: “It devalued me, and I still devalue myself because of it.”
NEXT UP
PART 2: WHEN FOOD HARMS

In this second installment, we take a close-up look at the
nutritional value and quantity of food served in prison and its
effects on health.

29

INTRO
PART 1
PART 2
PART 3
PART 4
PART 5
PART 6

PART 2

When Food Harms
“There are a lot of people who think, ‘Oh, you’re in prison, you don’t deserve
the best or to be comfortable.’ But it isn’t about the best or comfort, it’s about
providing the proper things that our body needs.”

\

— formerly incarcerated person

Part 1 of Eating Behind Bars provides a vivid portrait of mealtime in prison
as a daily degradation, characterized by food that is unappetizing at best.
But even the somewhat better tasting meals served in prison barely meet
people’s minimum nutritional needs—something painfully obvious to the
people who must eat these meals day after day.
In our surveys and interviews with formerly incarcerated people, the word most
commonly used to describe prison food is “unhealthy.” Other descriptors include
“processed,” “junk food,” “non-nutritious,” and even “malnourishing.”

PA R T 2 | W H E N F O O D H A R M S

Incarcerated people
are fed a diet that
everyone else has been
advised to avoid for

30

Nationwide, the prevailing trends are clear: prisons serve
mostly carb-heavy meals high in salt and sugar, with few or
no fresh fruits and vegetables and a scarcity of quality protein.
Incarcerated people are fed a diet that everyone else has been
advised to avoid for decades.

decades.
Carb loading
Virtually everyone we surveyed and interviewed describes
meals in which a combination of breads, biscuits, rice, pasta,
cake and cookies comprises the bulk of food on the tray. Carb
loading begins at breakfast, according to Miguel, who described
a typical morning meal at the West Coast facility where he
was sent to serve time: “Sometimes they serve a giant slab of
coffee cake as the breakfast entree. It must be like a thousand
calories.” Prisons in Washington State became notorious for
the daily “breakfast boat,” a carton containing dry cereal, sliced
white bread, a bran bar, and a muffin—four different highlyprocessed grain products—along with jelly packets, but no fresh
fruit and only a small amount of powdered milk and a packet of
peanut butter for protein.20

0
Technically, any food that has been
changed from its natural state is
processed. Many forms of processing
(e.g., cooking, freezing, chopping) do not
negatively impact a food’s nutrient profile.
Throughout this report, we use the
colloquial terms “highly-processed” and
“ultra-processed” to refer to food that has
been refined to a point where its nutrients
have been significantly compromised and
the resulting product is likely to have a
negative impact on health.

Breakfast is not the only meal abundant in empty calories;
lunch and dinner are much the same. One might be served a
four-by-four square of frozen pizza and a scoop of pasta in
the same meal. “They tend to starve us on protein,” Jonah
told us regarding his time in a Northeastern prison. “They say
it will be four ounces, but it’s actually two ounces, because
half of it is the breaded covering.” Prior to 2007 in Ohio, trays
featured four slices of bread per meal. “That’s almost a loaf of
bread per person per day! No one needs that!” insists Annette
Chambers-Smith, the current Director of the Ohio Department
of Corrections and Rehabilitation. This example (see “Today’s
Menu,” below) from Idaho’s state-wide prison system menu
highlights the preponderance of carbohydrates.

P A R T 2 WEE
| W KHLY
E NMENU
FOOD HARMS

Today’s menu

Muffin or cereal bar,
Sunflower seeds

Chicken patty, Noodles, Mixed
veggies, Bread, Margarine,
Iced choc. cake, Tomato sauce,
Cheese

MONDAY

Oatmeal, PB pancakes, Syrup,
Margarine, Sugar, Milk

Turkey salad, Bread, Tortilla
chips, Cookie

Beef tacos,
Lettuce/tomato/onion, Salsa,
Cake or brownie, Beans

Farina, French toast,
Margarine, Sugar, Milk, Syrup

Peanut butter, Jelly, Bread,
Veggie sticks, Potato chips

Scalloped potatoes/ham,
Bread, Broccoli, Fruit crisp,
Margarine

Oatmeal, Coffee cake,
Scrambled eggs, Sugar, Milk,
Margarine

Ham salad, Bread, Tortilla
chips, Bar cookie

Taco macaroni, Bread,
Margarine, Green beans,
Applesauce, Cake or brownie

Farina, Pumpkin bread,
Margarine, Sugar, Milk,
No-pork sausage

Peanut butter, Jelly, Bread,
Veggie sticks, Potato chips

Beef burrito, Corn, Salsa,
Mexican rice, Pudding,
Lettuce/tomato/onion, Banana

Oatmeal, Banana pancakes,
Sugar, Milk, Syrup, Margarine

Deli meat, Bread,
Mayo/mustard, Tortilla
chips, Cookie

Turkey ala king, Broccoli,
Biscuits, Margarine, Fruit,
Cake or brownie

Bran flakes, Breakfast hash,
Bread, Margarine, Sugar, Milk

Peanut butter, Jelly, Bread

Meatloaf, Parsley potato,
Tossed salad, Vinaigrette,
Bread, Margarine, Fruit,
Iced cake

WEDNESDAY

SUNDAY

Bran flakes, Biscuits, Country
gravy, Hash browns, Sugar,
Milk

TUESDAY

DINNER

THURSDAY

LUNCH

FRIDAY

Source: Idaho Department
of Corrections. IDOC food
service menu 6.9 - Mainline.
Link here

BREAKFAST

SATURDAY

This example comes from
Idaho’s Department of
Corrections state-wide menu

31

DAILY SNACK: Fresh Fruit

Our surveys and interviews with formerly incarcerated people,
roughly half of whom were released from prison in the past
five years, suggest a significant expansion of ultra-processed
soy products added as filler to entrees described as meat
(e.g., turkey casserole) or served instead of meat. While
many vegetarians and others interested in decreasing meat
consumption welcome these plant-based meat substitutes,
people in prison don’t get to choose whether to include soy
products in their meals. In some facilities, the near-daily use
of ultra-processed soy products without a protein alternative

PA R T 2 | W H E N F O O D H A R M S

32

leaves incarcerated people worried about the potential health
effects of consuming so much soy, and they don’t have access to
updated scientific research to dispel rumors or make informed
choices for themselves.
The surveys include numerous comments suggesting declining
availability of fresh cow’s milk, which many incarcerated people
rely on to get their protein, calcium, and vitamin D. There are
also complaints about the lack of plant-based substitutes for
people who are lactose intolerant or who choose not to consume
dairy for religious or ethical reasons.

ANNOTAT E D T R AY
YELLOW CAKE

BISCUITS

APPLE

A typical meal tray
Prisons serve mainly carbheavy meals high in salt and
sugar, with few or no fresh
fruits and vegetables, and a
scarcity of quality protein. See
this meal listed as Friday’s
dinner on the Idaho statewide menu above.

POWDERED DRINK MIX

BROCCOLI

MARGARINE

TURKEY ALA KING

PA R T 2 | W H E N F O O D H A R M S

A scarcity of
fresh produce

33

62.2%

11.3%

rarely/never

always/often

Source: Impact Justice(2020).
I had access
to fresh
vegetables

54.8%

15.9%

rarely/never

always/often

26.5%

23.3%

sometimes

sometimes

I had access
to fresh
fruits

Nothing fresh or flavorful

70%

of survey respondents
reported breaking policy in
order to get access to more
or higher quality food

Fresh vegetables and fruit, the essence of a healthy diet rich in
both nutrients and fiber, are exceedingly rare in prison. Threefifths of the formerly incarcerated people we surveyed responded
that they “rarely or never” had access to fresh vegetables in
prison (see “A scarcity of fresh produce,” above). According to our
investigation, incarcerated people are so desperate for anything
fresh that those with access to the kitchen will steal even onions
and peppers.
Canned vegetables, high in sodium and other preservatives,
appear far more frequently than frozen vegetables, explain
formerly incarcerated people who have worked in facility
kitchens. Both are typically served “boiled beyond recognition,”
Theo described, which diminishes their taste and nutritional
value. Although the occasional facility has a salad bar, they tend
to be meager in their offerings: typically iceberg lettuce and a
few lackluster accompaniments like shredded carrots and highcalorie dressings.
Fresh fruit is also extremely limited: Only one in six formerly
incarcerated people we surveyed report that they “always” or
“often” had access to it. Their comments indicate that when fresh
fruit is available, it’s mostly apples and the sporadic orange or
banana, all three of which are often either unripe or turning rotten.
The scarcity of fresh fruits and vegetables aligns with the fact that
almost everyone surveyed said their meals were not nutritious.

PA R T 2 | W H E N F O O D H A R M S

34

Because most prison meals are low in naturally-occurring
essential vitamins and minerals, powdered fortified
beverage mixes are routinely used to meet daily minimum
nutritional requirements.21 Health and nutrition professionals
overwhelmingly argue that supplements cannot replace
fresh, healthy food, which also contains fiber, antioxidants,
and complex compounds that help the body better absorb
the nutrients it needs. In addition, comments by formerly
incarcerated people suggest these artificial fruit-flavored drinks
have a chemical taste so unpleasant that many people do not
drink them, so those people are getting even fewer essential
nutrients in their daily diet. Others expressed concern about
the sugar or artificial sweeteners and dyes in these fortified
beverages.

t

Photos obtained by The Frontier and
taken with contraband cell phones
show meals served in Oklahoma state
prisons in 2020
Source: The Frontier

It’s important to emphasize that providing the recommended
minimum amount and type of nutrients is not adequate for
everyone or under all conditions. Depending on body size, age,
gender, activity level, and personal health concerns, people
need different levels of essential nutrients. We heard from very
active people who were worried about getting enough protein,
for example, along with older women who were troubled by lack
of access to foods rich in calcium, and younger women who were
anxious about iron intake. Also, for people in prison, it’s often not
possible to adjust one’s diet if, for instance, an individual feels a
cold coming on and wants to consume more foods with vitamin
C. Additionally, just because the ingredients of a meal meet
the minimum requirements, that doesn’t mean the meal itself
does. Nutrients (such as vitamins B and C) can be significantly
depleted in the process of cooking, storing, and reheating food.
Given that food in prison has so little intrinsic flavor, it’s not
surprising that many people describe it as excessively salty or
sweet—sometimes the only discernible tastes. Independent
analyses of prison meals echo their comments. In 2016, the
food administrator for the California Department of Corrections
and Rehabilitation admitted the sodium content of general
population meals averaged 3,500 milligrams per day, far

PA R T 2 | W H E N F O O D H A R M S

35

exceeding the limit of 2,300 milligrams under the USDA’s
2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans.22 An older but
independent nutritional analysis of food in South Carolina
correctional facilities, conducted in 2012, found much the same.
On average, a day’s meals contained 3,420 milligrams of sodium,
more than double the department’s goal of no more than 1,500
milligrams; the 97.5 grams of sugar per day was more than
double what the department intended to serve male residents
(37.5 grams) and more than triple the target amount for female
residents (25 grams).23 The meals were also high in cholesterol
and low in potassium, magnesium, and vitamin E, nutrients that
protect against heart disease, stroke, and cognitive decline.

The link between diet and health
Research shows that
just one month of
unhealthy meals can
result in long-term
rises in cholesterol and
body fat, increasing
the risk of diet-related
diseases.

Vague and confusing slogans like “Eat a balanced diet” and
“Breakfast is the most important meal of the day” contribute to
the poor grasp most Americans have of nutrition and its impact
on health. At the most rudimentary level, food functions as fuel
for our bodies in the form of calories derived from protein, fat,
and carbohydrates. But fuel alone is not enough. We also need
vitamins, minerals, and other naturally occurring micronutrients
to keep our heart pumping, bones strong, and muscles flexing,
and to support our body’s other vital systems. Without these
nutrients, our systems begin to deteriorate. A malnourished
person is often portrayed as emaciated, but someone can be
both malnourished and overweight, even obese, if they consume
an excess of calories lacking critical nutrients.
This is why a diet rich in fresh fruits and vegetables, high-quality
protein, whole grains, and healthy fats is so important. It not
only provides the most efficient fuel to maintain healthy body
weight, but also supplies the range of micronutrients essential
for good health. A 2017 study of dietary habits and longevity in
195 countries reveals that consuming vegetables, fruit, whole

PA R T 2 | W H E N F O O D H A R M S

36

Produce grown at Mountain View Correctional Facility (Charleston, Maine)
Source: Mark McBrine

FRESH FOOD
GROWN ON SITE

•
•

WHEN IT COMES TO FRESH FOOD, MOUNTAIN VIEW
CORRECTIONAL FACILIT Y IN CHARLESTON, MAINE, IS
A NOTABLE E XCEPTION TO THE PRE VAILING NATIONAL
TREND OF MINIMAL FRESH PRODUCE.

PROGR AMMING

MENU PL ANNING &
ME AL PREPAR ATION

In 2018, the facility grew 150,000 pounds of vegetables, herbs,
and fruit by farming its own two-and-a-half acre garden and
managing a seven-acre apple orchard with 18 heirloom varieties
on a leased plot of land nearby. The produce goes straight to
the facility kitchen, providing Mountain View residents with
vibrant, substantial salads and other nutrient-rich vegetables
during the growing season. The surplus of apples is distributed
among Maine’s other prisons. In the future, the state department
of corrections hopes to invest in equipment that will allow this
facility to flash-freeze produce for use over the winter.
In 2019, through a partnership with the Maine Department of
Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, Mountain View doubled its garden
acreage, making space for planting 200 new fruit trees that in
time will add fresh plums, peaches, pears, and cherries to the
bounty of fresh apples. Mountain View’s approach to providing
fresh produce to support the health of residents and staff is one
that other rural prisons could adopt.

PA R T 2 | W H E N F O O D H A R M S

37

grains, and fish is strongly associated with a longer life, while
those whose diets include few of these foods and are heavy
in sugar, salt, and trans fats are more likely to die early.24 The
study also reports that consuming more healthy foods is a more
effective way to reduce mortality than cutting back on sugars
and fats.25
Consuming a diet of empty calories, on the other hand—even
for short periods of time—can lead to a plethora of physical and
mental health problems, some with lasting consequences.26
Research shows that just one month of unhealthy meals can
result in long-term rises in cholesterol and body fat, increasing
the risk of diet-related diseases.27

Gaining weight or wasting away

“Over the last
two decades I’ve
witnessed a weight
gain in the offender
population and more
offenders become
insulin dependent.”
— corrections officer

Michael was sent to prison at age 20. In fewer than three
years in a West Coast facility, he had gained over one hundred
pounds and was diagnosed with hypertension. Eli told us he
had never weighed more than 180 pounds, but within a year of
being incarcerated in a Northeastern prison he weighed 240.
“I struggle to stay at 240. And I work the grounds,” he told us.
While it is possible to be healthy at a range of sizes, there is a
documented link between excess weight and chronic illness,
and the prison environment is not conducive to eating nourishing
meals and engaging in physical activity, both protective factors
at any weight.
A 2016 report from the Bureau of Justice Statistics found that
incarcerated people suffer from higher rates of diabetes and
heart disease (both often associated with metabolic issues that
stem from excess weight) than the general public (see “Health
Disparities”).28 Whether people enter prison with these health
issues or develop them while incarcerated, the typical prison
diet exacerbates those conditions. Many corrections officers
have noted this with concern. “Over the last two decades I’ve

PA R T 2 | W H E N F O O D H A R M S

What exactly is a
healthy diet?

38

There isn’t one single definition of a healthy diet. Individuals
have different requirements based on age, gender, genetics,
activity level, personal health conditions, moral and religious
concerns, cultural conceptions of wellness, and other factors.
An optimal diet for one body, like going vegan or eating a hearty
breakfast each day, might not be ideal for another. Moreover,
some common precepts of “proper” nutrition in the United
States (such as drinking milk each day) are rooted in white and
Westernized constructions of a healthy diet, neglecting the
needs and customs of people from marginalized communities.
In our survey, more than four out of five formerly incarcerated
people reported that they never had any choice or input
regarding the food on their meal trays, taking away their agency
to tailor their diet according to their needs. Ways of eating that
promote well-being can be rooted in any number of dietary
patterns and cultural traditions from around the globe, but the
science and traditional wisdom are clear: a diet abundant in
whole foods and low in sugar, salt, refined starches, and trans
fats is a good path to health.

witnessed a weight gain in the offender population and more
offenders become insulin dependent,” one officer wrote to
us. Another reported observing an “increase in high blood
pressure and diabetes amongst the prison population.” Medical
professionals typically recommend dietary modifications to treat
health problems like diabetes, heart disease, and hypertension,
but medical diets (discussed later in this section) aren’t always
accessible, and incarcerated people don’t have the option of
modifying the food on their trays.
While far less common, rapid and drastic weight loss is a
problem for some incarcerated people, particularly those who
can’t afford to purchase commissary items, and individuals in
solitary confinement where the quality and quantity of food is

PA R T 2 | W H E N F O O D H A R M S

39

Health disparities

44%
3%

Data from the Bureau of
Justice Statistics shows
that incarcerated people
experience higher rates of
both chronic conditions and
infectious disease, some of
which are diet-related.

Incarcerated people
General public
Source: Maruschak, L., Berzofsky,
M., & Unangst, J. (2016, October 4).
Medical problems of state and federal
prisoners and jail inmates, 2011-12.
Bureau of Justice Statistics. Link here

31%
21%

■
10%

18%

High blood
pressure

5%
Infectious
disease

Heart related
problems

Diabetes

All chronic
conditions

30%
7%

■
9%

even worse. Rapid weight loss can put individuals at risk of many
health problems, including muscle loss, severe dehydration and
electrolyte imbalances, gallstones, and a slowed metabolism;
individuals who become underweight are also more susceptible
to cardiovascular disease and early death than those of normal
weight.29 Shawn’s 11-year sentence in a Northeastern prison
included a stint in solitary confinement, where her weight
quickly dropped from 136 to 122; she later struggled to regain
the weight. “I was skinny in a facility that has a lot of violence,”
she told us. “My body was not my weapon anymore, and people
could take me.”

A wide range of diet-related diseases
Gastrointestinal issues are another common ailment. A 2018
survey of incarcerated people conducted by the Incarcerated
Workers Organizing Committee (IWOC) reveals that nearly twothirds of respondents replied affirmatively to the question, “Has
the food made you sick in the last year?”30 In our surveys and
interviews, formerly incarcerated people describe the constant
gnawing pain of gastritis and acid reflux, as well as facility-wide
outbreaks of pathogens such as salmonella and E. coli. A 2017
study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found
that incarcerated men and women are six times more likely than

PA R T 2 | W H E N F O O D H A R M S

t

A corrections officer holds up a tray of food
for incarcerated people at a prison near
Houston, Texas in 2013
Source: Alamy

The reality of
poor nutrition in
prison and how it
contributes to the
spread of disease and
to poor metabolic
health has been
overlooked.

40

the general public to contract a foodborne illness.31
People also told us about being diagnosed in prison with anemia
due to insufficient iron, and with bone loss from inadequate
calcium. One family member wrote, “My husband has been
showing signs of edema, headaches, high blood pressure,
diabetes, due to the foods being unhealthy and unbalanced.”
Another wrote that an incarcerated loved one’s teeth displayed
signs of malnutrition.
More generally, a diet lacking in critical vitamins and minerals
weakens the immune system, contributing to the spread and
severity of infectious diseases. “When the flu runs around here, it
doesn’t matter how much medicine we have, we need nutrition,”
one corrections officer explained to us, adding, “It’s just common
sense.” COVID-19 revealed to the general public how quickly
a virus spreads in prisons and jails, proving especially lethal
among people with underlying health problems. But the reality
of poor nutrition in prison and how it contributes to the spread
of disease and to poor metabolic health—the underlying root of
many serious health conditions—has been overlooked.32

PA R T 2 | W H E N F O O D H A R M S

41

I MPAC T ON M I ND & B ODY

Conditions attributed to
prison food consumption
Headaches, brain fog, stroke, impaired
neurodevelopment, depression and
anxiety, “hanger”

As reported by Impact Justice
survey respondents

Thyroid issues
Heart disease, high cholesterol,
hypertension, aggressive and hostile
behavior

Fragile teeth

Diabetes, gastroesophageal
reflux, kidney trouble, gallstones,
hormonal imbalances, cancer

Suppressed immune system

Hunger, increased body fat, food
poisoning, gastritis, ulcers, rapid
weight gain/loss, irritable bowel
syndrome

Anemia, slow healing

Edema

Bone loss

From depression to aggression
Along with declines in physical health, nutritional deficiencies
have been shown to contribute to mental and behavioral health
issues ranging from brain fog to violence. A 2015 study of
incarcerated men in Australia connects low levels of omega-3
fatty acids (found in oily fish, seafood, nuts, and seeds) with
more aggressive behavior.33 Improper levels of cholesterol,
tryptophan, phytoestrogens, carbohydrates, sugars, zinc,
and protein also appear to increase aggression, other studies
show.34 The connection between meals and behavior doesn’t

PA R T 2 | W H E N F O O D H A R M S

42

go unnoticed by corrections staff. One officer suggested that
serving more “meals consisting of carbohydrates increases
aggression in the offender population,” while another remarked
that the prison food experience triggers “emotional upheaval,
hostility, anger and hatred for prison staff.”

“Mentally, I’m not the
same. I’m emotionally
detached. My mental
and emotional health
are damaged.”
— formerly incarcerated person

Perhaps most commonly, being served unappetizing and
sometimes downright awful food day after day is depressing.
The partner of one incarcerated person wrote, “I have never
seen my husband this depressed.” While virtually every aspect
of prison is depressing, and for many anxiety-provoking,
a poor diet makes it even harder to cope.35 One formerly
incarcerated man wrote to us that after the experience of eating
in confinement, “Mentally, I’m not the same. I’m emotionally
detached. My mental and emotional health are damaged.”
Common practices such as unreasonably early or brief
mealtimes, hostile and degrading eating environments, and
total lack of control over food options can heighten these
psychological effects.36 The director of a women’s reentry
organization told us about clients who were retaliated against
for advocating for their dietary needs, leading to chronic anxiety
and aggravated health conditions even after their release. She
added, “So many women go in a size four and come out a size
twelve. These women are suffering from depression because they
don’t feel like the same person, they can’t wear the same clothes.”

Exacerbating factors: trauma and substance use
There is also evidence that factors like trauma and substance abuse
are closely linked to an unhealthy relationship with food. Trauma
can impact eating habits and the way the body processes food,
and conversely, food insecurity and malnutrition can cause lasting
trauma. The current prison eating experience can retrigger trauma
and fails to take advantage of opportunities to support resilience,
which could improve rehabilitative outcomes.

PA R T 2 | W H E N F O O D H A R M S

43

Adverse childhood /
community experiences
(ACES)

ACE S
Trauma from ACES translates into negative
physiological impacts, which in turn have social,
emotional, and cognitive impacts. This graphic
lists some of the ACES that can impact one’s
relationship with food.

ENVIRONMENT

Source: Leah’s Pantry (2019).
COMMUNITY
HOUSEHOLD
Incarcerated family member
Divorce
Homelessness
Lack of food security
Domestic violence
Bullying
Alcoholism & drug abuse

Lack of access to nourishment
Historical trauma
Substandard schools
Structural racism
Violence
Poor water & air quality

Record heat & droughts
Wildfires & smoke
Record storms, flooding &
mudslides
Sea level rise
Tornadoes & hurricanes
Volcano eruptions & tsunamis
Earthquakes

Lack of jobs
Substandard wages
Lack of social capital & mobility

Emotional & sexual abuse
Maternal depression

COMMUNITY

Having a history of trauma is widespread among individuals
entering the justice system, even before the potentially
traumatizing experience of incarceration.37 Trauma frequently
stems from the social and environmental factors commonly
referred to as adverse childhood/community experiences,
ACES for short (see above).38 Leah’s Pantry, a California-based
nonprofit that focuses on trauma-informed nutrition initiatives,
describes trauma as the neurological and biological residue of
toxic stress resulting from ACES, and explains that such stress
disrupts positive relationships with food.39
Food insecurity, the social stigma of relying on food stamps,
and experiencing food as a weapon of control, manipulation,
or punishment all fall under the heading of ACES; however, the
relationship between trauma and food is not limited to these
direct factors.40 Leah’s Pantry uses the metaphor of a house to
explain how trauma and nourishment are inextricably linked (see
“How trauma disrupts our relationship with food,” below). When
ACES are built into the foundation, they can lead to impaired
neurodevelopment and can negatively affect the body in
numerous ways, including chronic inflammation, increased body

PA R T 2 | W H E N F O O D H A R M S

44

How trauma disrupts our
relationship with food
Just as a shaky foundation causes instability
throughout a house, trauma from ACES translates
into negative physiological impacts, which
USE
inHO
turn
have social, emotional, and cognitive
repercussions. This graphic illustrates the
ways that trauma and one’s relationship to food
influence each other, often to distressing effect.
Source: Leah’s Pantry (2019).

EARLY DEATH

ILLNESS & LIMITED SELF-SUFFICIENCY
Obesity | Heart disease | Diabetes | Kidney disease
BEHAVIORAL RESPONSE, COPING STRATEGIES
Overeating | Unhealthy diet | Poor sleep hygiene| Alcoholism
SOCIAL, EMOTIONAL, & COGNITIVE IMPACTS
“Survival brain” vs “rational brain” | Craving high fat/high sugar
Decreased emotional and physical self-regulation
HISTORIC AND
GENERATIONAL TRAUMA
Epigenetic predisposition to
poor health | Diet shaped by
colonization and/or
oppression

DISRUPTED NEURODEVELOPMENT, BIOLOGICAL “WEAR AND TEAR”
Damaged metabolism | Increased body fat | Inflammation |
Gut-brain circuitry
ADVERSE CHILDHOOD & COMMUNITY EXPERIENCES, TOXIC STRESS
Food insecurity | Manipulation and abuse through food | Food

RACE, BIAS, ECONOMIC,
& SOCIAL CONDITIONS
Unequal and unjust food
access| Unhealthy food
environments

assistance stigma

fat, damaged metabolism, and disrupted gut-brain circuitry,
which controls satiety cues, for example. These physiological
harms have social, emotional, and cognitive impacts that can
make people feel anxious and lacking in control, leading many to
adopt unhealthy behaviors as coping mechanisms—which have
their own negative impacts on health and can perpetuate the
conditions that give rise to ACES.
Public health initiatives often fail to recognize the connection
between underlying harms and people’s overall relationship to
food, positioning unhealthy eating as a discrete issue rather than
a symptom of a larger problem.41 Providing access to nutritious
food and positive eating experiences is one important way to

PA R T 2 | W H E N F O O D H A R M S

45

address those underlying harms, to begin bringing body and mind
into a state of wellness, and to interrupt patterns of thinking,
feeling, and behaving that may have led to incarceration.

For the 85% of people
in prison who wrestle
with substance use,
the typical prison diet
may fuel cravings
for highly palatable
sweets and snacks.

GARDENING &
COOKING FOR
HE ALTH

•
•

PROCUREMENT

REENTRY

Substance use is a common coping mechanism and a
frequent pathway to incarceration. Groundbreaking research
on substance use and its relationship to gut health shows
that individuals with substance use disorder (SUD) may be
malnourished not only due to social and financial factors, such
as homelessness or lack of money for food, but also as a result
of biochemically-induced cravings for sweets and other ultraprocessed foods that are easily digestible.42 Those struggling
with SUD can experience micronutrient deficiencies that stem
from both inadequate intake of healthy food and malabsorption
of vitamins and minerals due to compromised function of the
digestive system and disruption of the gut’s microbiome. As we
discuss above, these micronutrient deficiencies can significantly
impact multiple facets of physical and mental health. For the
85% of people in prison who wrestle with substance use, the
typical prison diet may fuel cravings for highly palatable sweets
and snacks and therefore miss an opportunity to support
recovery through exposure to nutrient-dense, fiber-rich food.43

GET TING ONE’S HANDS IN THE DIRT, TENDING PL ANTS,
AND COOKING FOOD OFFER SENSORY AND AESTHETIC
E XPERIENCES THAT CAN STIMUL ATE THE BR AIN IN
NEW AND POSITIVE WAYS, IMPROVING AT TITUDES,
BEHAVIORS, AND OVER ALL MENTAL HE ALTH.
Gardening and culinary education programs in prison are
associated with boosts in self-esteem and resilience, reductions
in violence, and the fostering of positive relationships.44 While
these programs teach skills that make people more employable
after release, the best programs go beyond basic skills and help
people learn and grow, even within the constraints of prison.

PA R T 2 | W H E N F O O D H A R M S

Though the history of incarcerated people working the soil is fraught with connections
to slavery and convict leasing (which we’ll discuss in Section 4 of Eating Behind Bars),
there are some laudable gardening programs in prisons across the country that include
extensive educational components. At the Maine State Prison, people working on the
grounds and gardens crews are encouraged to take the Master Gardener course, run in
partnership with the University of Maine Cooperative Extension. The program allows
incarcerated people to complete their course volunteer hours during their sentences
so they can be fully certified before they are released. Insight Garden Program, which
operates in prisons throughout California and in Ohio, integrates transformational tools
like meditation, emotional process work, and ecotherapy into its courses on organic
gardening and sustainable systems. And the Sustainability in Prisons Project (SPP), a
partnership between the Washington Department of Corrections and The Evergreen
State College, equips participants with the scientific knowledge and practical skills to
maintain various environmental initiatives, including conservation efforts, beekeeping
programs, and ample food gardens—bringing incarcerated individuals together with
scientists, college staff, and students on the outside. In 2018, SPP sites produced more
than 246,700 pounds of fresh produce, a harvest shared among prison kitchens and
local food pantries.
The better prison culinary programs also go above and beyond safe food handling and
other basics. Quentin Cooks, a culinary training course at San Quentin State Prison in
California run by professional chefs, teaches people where food comes from, how to
prepare delicious meals with high-quality ingredients, and how to function as part of
a team of kitchen professionals with different roles, along with budgeting and other
restaurant management skills. Participants talk about how the program not only
prepares them to work in an upscale professional kitchen but also lights up their lives
in prison. Program staff “treat us like humans and not like caged animals,” one person
observed, which restores individual dignity and builds self-confidence.
The experience of cooking and eating together forges relationships across racial and
other differences that are typically barriers in prison. A participant named Max perhaps
captures it best: “It breaks down the walls we put up as prisoners to protect ourselves.”
Quentin Cooks is currently working with employers in the hospitality industry to create
a pipeline to jobs for program graduates once they leave prison, and lead instructor
Chef Huw Thornton hopes to expand the program to prisons statewide.

46

PA R T 2 | W H E N F O O D H A R M S

Incarcerated people with approved
special diets receive a modified version
or alternative to the mainline meal. For
example, someone on a gluten-free
diet in Washington would receive an
alternative to the pasta and tortilla wrap
shown above.
Source: Impact Justice

Even something as
simple as synchronizing
the distribution of
medications that must
be taken with food with
facility mealtimes may not
occur routinely or ever.

47

Special diets
For individuals with special dietary needs, the challenge of
eating well in prison becomes even more fraught because
incarcerated people have little choice or control over what
they eat. Although prisons are required to provide meals that
accommodate a person’s diagnosed medical needs and religious
beliefs, in practice those needs may go unmet. In a survey, the
Incarcerated Workers Organizing Committee found that half of
respondents had special dietary needs, and nearly three-fourths
of those people did not get their needs met.45 We heard from a
number of formerly incarcerated people about special diets being
denied, delayed, or revoked without reason or upon transfer to a
new facility (in the latter case, taking months to be reinstated).
Aaron, who is allergic to beans, remembers undergoing allergy
testing while he was incarcerated in a Southwestern prison and
waiting a year and a half before being approved for a special
diet. In the interim, he suffered severe gastrointestinal distress
from regularly eating beans, an element of many daily meals,
“because they didn’t feed us enough,” he told us. “I ate them and
I suffered ... I was clutched up in my cell in pain.” Once his special

PA R T 2 | W H E N F O O D H A R M S

48

diet was finally authorized, Aaron learned that pasta, not an
alternative source of protein, would be replacing beans on his tray.

We documented accounts
of facilities failing to
provide adequate meals
for diabetics—instead
serving them the same
white bread and white rice
everyone else receives,
and telling diabetics to
eat around them because
“that mirrors the realworld experience.”

In our investigation, we documented accounts of facilities failing
to provide adequate meals for diabetics—instead serving them
the same white bread and white rice everyone else receives,
and telling diabetics to eat around them because “that mirrors
the real-world experience”—and of pregnant women going
without prenatal vitamins and getting insufficient supplemental
foods. Even something as simple as providing medications
that must be taken with food during facility mealtimes may
not occur routinely, if ever. And if a medically recommended
dietary change doesn’t match the kind of food on hand in the
facility—eating more red meat to improve hemoglobin levels, for
example—it’s highly unlikely to be met.
People whose religion dictates certain dietary restrictions
may have to jump through many bureaucratic hoops simply to
follow their beliefs, and sometimes the food they are provided
is even more meager than the standard fare. When Michelle,
a practicing Buddhist, asked her prison’s Catholic chaplain to
approve her request for vegetarian meals, he demanded proof
that her faith espouses vegetarianism. A Protestant chaplain
eventually helped her, but many of the meals she received
consisted of a rubbery soy hot dog, a scoop of canned fruit
cocktail, and nothing else. On other occasions, she was served
a portion of onions and peppers spooned out of beef stew, or
chicken in gravy minus the chicken.
Recent news reports reveal that incarcerated Muslims in Arizona
prisons are being served vegetarian trays instead of halal
meals.46 Muslims in Virginia and Alaska prisons have sought
legal recourse after being denied an alternative meal schedule
to accommodate fasting during the daylight hours of Ramadan.47

PA R T 2 | W H E N F O O D H A R M S

94%

of survey respondents
couldn’t eat enough in
prison to feel full

93%

of survey respondents
were hungry between
meals

“Being hungry as a result
of small portions leads
to inevitable anger. It’s a
source of grief, sadness,
anger.”
— loved one of someone who is incarcerated

49

We also learned from Alicia, who spent 15 years in a West Coast
prison, that in some facilities kosher meals are in such high
demand that people lie about their faith to get one. The meals
typically come prepackaged and sealed, making them appear
more sanitary, and are thought to taste better. Meanwhile,
people who are actually Jewish may sell their kosher meal
because they need money, perhaps to buy soap, toothpaste, or
something else essential, Alicia told us.

Always hungry
A reporter who visited a South Carolina prison in 2016 described
the day’s lunch: “Only four of the plastic tray’s six molded
compartments were occupied. In addition to the warmed-over
round of bologna streaked with a half-inch band of gray, there
was a sour-smelling heap of macaroni salad, two misshapen
pieces of bread and shredded iceberg lettuce.”48
With a preponderance of food that doesn’t function as food
should—taste good, satiate hunger, and nourish body and mind—
nearly everyone we surveyed said they couldn’t eat enough in
prison to feel full (94%) and were hungry between meals (93%).
One person described it as a “constant hunger gnawing at you.”
Another mentioned “hanger,” the anger that results from being
hungry nearly all of the time. The IWOC survey reports similar
statistics, with four out of five respondents stating they were
denied meals or given too little food in the previous year. “I am
hungry every day and I eat everything on every tray,” one person
wrote in reply.49
That degree of hunger can make people desperate. When Aaron
worked in the prison library, he got to know his staff supervisor’s
lunch schedule and that she normally threw away half her meal.
He’d put a fresh liner in the trash can before lunch and later
retrieve what she discarded: “Fresh fruit, a sandwich, a lot better
than what [we were served].”

PA R T 2 | W H E N F O O D H A R M S

50

Small portions compound the problem of hunger. Numerous
people compared serving sizes to trays in an elementary school
cafeteria. Marcus, who spent 22 years in different West Coast
prisons, described the amount as “just enough to keep you alive.
I never felt full.”

“It’s as if someone
handed you two
Snickers bars and
called it dinner.”
— Theo, incarcerated 8 years

Although daily calorie intake, along with other nutritional
guidelines, is mandated at the state agency level and approved
by a dietitian, calories alone are not enough when they are
concentrated in the form of white bread and squares of cake. As
Theo said, it’s as if someone handed you two Snickers bars and
called it dinner. Serving sizes can be so meager that the required
calorie count can only be reached by adding pats of margarine.
“To hit the calories required, you would have to eat every single
thing, including condiments,” Eli explained to us regarding the
Northeastern prison where he was sent to serve time.
When the incarcerated population was a fraction of its current
size, many facilities allowed second helpings at meals—few
do today. While agencies limit portions to control costs, some
also use portion control as the primary or only defense against
growing rates of high blood pressure and other diet-related
diseases. But universal portion control leaves many incarcerated
people, particularly those with larger physiques and more active
individuals, without the fuel their bodies require.
Quantity can also be inconsistent, varying from meal to meal,
depending on the kitchen staff’s capacity for planning and
preparation, and from tray to tray. We learned from James, a
Black man recently released after 22 years of incarceration in
the Southeast, that racism among kitchen workers can result
in white people getting larger helpings, while as a person of
color, “you’re not going to get anything extra.” Unfortunately,
the prevalent solution to this problem—“blind feeding,” in which
there’s a barrier between the kitchen server and recipient,
and a tray is pushed through a slot—adds to the dehumanizing
environment in the dining hall.

PA R T 2 | W H E N F O O D H A R M S

51

Both corrections staff and those who have experienced
incarceration say that much of what lands on the tray is thrown
away, either because people are required to take an entire
meal even if they only want select items, or because the food is
simply inedible. This is a poor use of limited resources, and this
extensive food waste has consequences for the environment.50

Lasting effects

As one person we
surveyed explained,
“It’s hard to get in the
habit of eating healthy
when a person just
ate what was handy
by habit. To be able to
shop healthy is also
expensive. And I have
no clue how to.”
— formerly incarcerated person

For some people, the ill effects of a poor diet in prison linger
long after they are released. Eating habits once required for
survival, or ones that brought a modicum of pleasure in an
otherwise punishing environment, can be hard to break; the
trauma of prison can manifest in both physical and psychological
reactions to food. Many formerly incarcerated people we
surveyed and interviewed described ongoing struggles to
maintain a healthy weight and a positive relationship with food.
People also described a series of health problems they believe
stem at least in part from the food they ate in prison: persistent
hypertension, diabetes, gastroesophageal reflux, ulcers, kidney
problems, high cholesterol, hormonal imbalances, irritable
bowel syndrome, gallstones, thyroid issues, fragile teeth and
bones, cancer, and more.
Cuts and bruises, sprains and strains are slow to heal for
Natalia after decades in prison eating meals lacking essential
nutrients.51 Others mentioned addiction to sugary and salty
foods. Jordan worries about his health and that of his wife Rosa,
who spent 33 years in prison: “She’s had a stroke, but hasn’t laid
off the soda, the chips, snacks. I’ve told her, I don’t want anything
fried, don’t fry anything, but she does, and I’ve gained weight
because of it. A lot of salt, it’s an unhealthy way of cooking. She’d
rather eat a bowl of [ramen] soup than anything else, even in the
morning for breakfast.” As one person we surveyed explained,
“It’s hard to get in the habit of eating healthy when a person just
ate what was handy by habit. To be able to shop healthy is also
expensive. And I have no clue how to.”

PA R T 2 | W H E N F O O D H A R M S

Several people
mentioned a tendency
to hoard food because,
as one individual
wrote, “I have an
ingrained fear of not
knowing what I will be
eating next.”

52

Several people mentioned a tendency to hoard food because,
as one individual wrote, “I have an ingrained fear of not knowing
what I will be eating next.” Many others described a habit of
eating too quickly, for reasons such as “I am used to trying not
to taste it,” or “because of the way the guards would yell at me
to hurry up.” This is often coupled with overeating. For months
after being released, Michelle ate so quickly she couldn’t taste
the food. Her tendency to overeat became so extreme that a
doctor prescribed medication to suppress her appetite. Even now
her wife frequently admonishes her to slow down during meals.
Our survey respondents and interviewees also frequently
mentioned a chronic compulsion to control what goes into their
bodies. “I still would rather be the one in the kitchen or doing the
grocery shopping,” one individual wrote, adding “It terrifies me
that I may be stuck at home, with food I hate, allergic to, etc. ...
I HAVE to be in control of the food in my home.” Others added,
“I’m traumatized with food and extra careful to see where it
comes from,” and “Nothing others cook unless I’m there to see
how it’s prepared.”
The physical and psychological impacts are profound on
people of all ages, but the consequences of prison food can be
particularly damaging for young people. James, who spent over
22 years in prison after being incarcerated as a juvenile, pointed
out that the majority of violent offenders are young people under
25, before the age when impulse control typically solidifies in the
brain.52 He is concerned that years—and sometimes decades—of
prison food have an especially detrimental effect on the brain
development of those locked up in their youth: “You’re going to
return them back to society and people expect them to conduct
themselves like they’re 38, but what if their brain has never
developed due to [lack of] nutrition?”
As we’ve detailed throughout this section, good nutrition is
critical for a healthy mind and body. Our relationship with food,

PA R T 2 | W H E N F O O D H A R M S

53

however, goes beyond nutrients. If food doesn’t taste good, it
doesn’t fully nourish us (and conversely, snack foods designed to
be “hyperpalatable” aren’t fully satisfying to our bodies either).
A truly nourishing relationship with food balances nutrition and
pleasure, whether through the enjoyment of cooking, savoring
the occasional treat, or connecting with others over meals—all of
which people continue to need when they’re confined in prison.

NEXT UP
PART 3: FROM THE CHOW HALL TO “HOME COOKING” IN PRISON

In this third installment we focus on the physical environments
where meals take place and the effects of those environments
on health and wellness. We also explore “home cooking” in
prison.

54

INTRO

I
I
I
I
I
I
I

PART 1
PART 2
PART 3
PART 4
PART 5
PART 6

PART 3

From the Chow Hall to
“Home Cooking” in Prison
“The minute you walk through that area, it smelled like
something was rotten and dying.”
— formerly incarcerated person

The first two installments of Eating Behind Bars focused on the quality
of the food itself. This section begins by examining the bleak physical
environments and fraught dynamics in which prison meals take place, and
why those environments matter.
People have been eating together throughout history. Ancient archaeological sites show
evidence of this in the arrangement of the hearth, food-related tools and equipment, and
even preserved fragments of food. Quite simply, sharing a meal is part of being human.
In prisons that house hundreds if not thousands of people, official mealtime is inherently
a collective affair, except of course for people confined to their cell. But the typical prison
chow hall bears little resemblance to a shared meal in the free world.

PA R T 3 | F R O M T H E C H O W H A L L TO “ H O M E CO O K I N G ” I N P R I S O N

t

55

Men eat in a dining hall at Lakeview
Shock Correctional Facility in upstate
New York in 2013
Source: Getty Images

Eating en masse: the chow hall

“You have guns and
guards on you at all
times. You don’t know
if it’s even safe. Your
enemy can be sitting
right next to you.”
— Marcus, incarcerated 22 years

85%

of survey respondents
stated that the place
where they ate
most meals was not
welcoming or social

Marcus described the chow hall in the West Coast prison where
he was incarcerated as a “very scary” and “nerve-wracking”
environment. “You have guns and guards on you at all times. You
don’t know if it’s even safe. Your enemy can be sitting right next
to you.” As his recollections suggest, incarcerated people have
to navigate complex social norms defined by the residents—eyes
cast down on your own tray unless engaging a friend, and not
sharing food with someone of a different race, for example—and
by the official rules.
Such a crowded, stressful environment combined with
unpalatable food creates conditions in which tensions run high
and fights can break out with little or no warning. Corrections
officials told us that in an effort to keep the peace and protect
especially vulnerable residents from “grooming” or outright
intimidation by residents with more power, some prisons
prohibit talking during mealtime or the sharing of food with
anyone, even if it will otherwise go to waste—rules that might
be enforced inconsistently, depending on who’s on duty in the
dining hall that meal.

PA R T 3 | F R O M T H E C H O W H A L L TO “ H O M E CO O K I N G ” I N P R I S O N

56

During our investigation, we learned that personal spices or
sauces that people might use to enhance the bland food or cover
up an unpleasant taste are often banned from dining halls for
the same reason. That someone’s hot sauce, and the envy or
resentment it might spark in others, could cause a fight or be
used as a weapon says a lot about the environment in the typical
prison chow hall.
The people we surveyed and interviewed who have endured
thousands of mealtimes in prison almost uniformly described
the chow hall as drab and bleak, lacking in natural light, loud,
and often uncomfortably hot or cold. As Marcus said, “It’s a box.
Everything is metal. It’s cold.” While these qualities describe
prison in general, they seem to feel especially harsh when
coupled with food, which people look to for comfort. The wornout trays and dull plastic sporks used in the name of security add
to the degradation.

Fight-or-flight states not
only inhibit digestion,
but also increase
the likelihood of
misinterpreting social
cues as hostility, which
heightens security
risks for both staff and
incarcerated people.

Science is beginning to reveal the deeper effects of such
obviously unpleasant environments and how they can
exacerbate a negative relationship with food. The quality
of light, for example, affects how the body processes food.
While natural daylight supports metabolic health, lack of
exposure to natural light, as well as exposure to artificial light
in the evening, appears to impact blood glucose levels and
insulin sensitivity, therefore increasing the risk of obesity and
diabetes.53 Researchers have also documented a correlation
between ambient noise, what people choose to eat, and how
much they enjoy a meal: In louder environments, people tend to
eat fewer fruits and vegetables and derive less pleasure from
a meal.54 Other research shows that noisy environments often
signal danger, particularly to those with histories of trauma and
victimization. When such environments are combined with other
perceived threats (such as armed guards or past experiences
of violence in that location), this can prompt people to enter a
fight-or-flight mode without realizing it.55 Fight-or-flight states
not only inhibit digestion, but also increase the likelihood of
misinterpreting social cues as hostility, which heightens security
risks for both staff and incarcerated people.

PA R T 3 | F R O M T H E C H O W H A L L TO “ H O M E CO O K I N G ” I N P R I S O N

LET TING THE
LIGHT IN
E ATING ENVIRONMENT

57

The chow hall at Cedar Creek Corrections Center in Littlerock,
Washington, has a wall of windows that fill the space with
natural light. There is also an adjacent outdoor eating area
accessible to all residents and staff, weather permitting, and
those tables are reportedly packed in the summer as people
enjoy the fresh air.
The dining hall at Las Colinas Detention and Reentry Facility
in Santee, California, is similarly light-filled. In 2014 a local
architecture firm had a vision for transforming what was a
particularly unpleasant area in this facility into a warm and
inviting place for women to gather and eat. Today, sunlight
beams through a wall of floor-to-ceiling windows, enhancing
the light greens and soft earth tones of the new space. Regular
chairs and tables have replaced the conventional bolteddown metal tables and stools, giving the room the air of a
museum cafeteria. While movement through the meal line is
still regimented, rules have changed to allow conversation
and the sharing of food between women seated at the same
table. Staff and residents report feeling more relaxed and less
stressed during meals, leading to a positive shift in atmosphere
throughout the facility.

t

Las Colinas Detention and Reentry Facility
Source: Lawrence Anderson
Photography, Inc. and HMC Architects

Las Colinas Detention and Reentry
Facility is a county facility operated
by the San Diego County Sheriff’s
Department. We include Las Colinas
here because it was the only example
we encountered of a facility with an
eating environment that aims to mirror
life on the outside.

The unpleasant and sometimes threatening atmosphere of
the chow hall is a self-fulfilling prophecy. Chow halls and their
rules are designed with assumptions of misconduct and uncivil
behavior in mind. Sociologists have found that such expectations
actually can become determinants of behavior for incarcerated
individuals.56 If incarcerated people are treated as though they
can’t handle eating in a less-regimented environment, they are
more likely to meet that expectation. Conversely, loosening
unnecessary restrictions and making the dining area feel more
welcoming, like better eating environments outside prison, can
actually enhance safety, while creating a more satisfying eating
experience (see “Letting the light in,” above).

PA R T 3 | F R O M T H E C H O W H A L L TO “ H O M E CO O K I N G ” I N P R I S O N

58

Some of the worst chow halls are flat-out unsanitary. Our
surveys and interviews reveal accounts of visible mold on walls,
swarms of insects buzzing overhead, and odors of “something
rotten and dying.” In one case, people ate for years in a space
that was eventually shut down because of exposure to toxic mold
and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), both of which can cause
a host of serious health issues.57
Eating in prison is typically a regimented, impersonal, and
rushed affair. “It always felt like feeding us was more like a
duty,” explains Natalia, who served time on the East Coast.
“They don’t care if people are really nourished. That affects
you mentally.” While incarcerated people are supposed to have
15-20 minutes to eat a meal, they can spend much of that time
waiting in line until it’s their turn to receive a tray. Scarfing down
food, especially in a state of anxiety or fear, obviously hinders
digestion. So do breakfast calls in the middle of the night,
unnaturally early dinner times, and reported lapses between
meals of more than 14 hours during the weekend when there are
fewer staff.58

Formerly incarcerated
people also describe the
shame of eating in front
of staff who look at them
in disgust; tension with
staff keeps some people
from going to the chow
hall at all.

Formerly incarcerated people also describe the shame of
eating in front of staff who look at them in disgust; tension with
staff keeps some people from going to the chow hall at all. A
parent we surveyed wrote that his incarcerated son skips dinner
to avoid “an aggressively antagonistic” staff member, and is
perpetually hungry and losing weight as a result.
We also heard multiple accounts of officers teasing or taunting
incarcerated people with food. Alicia, who spent 15 years inside,
told us that corrections staff would frequently hold office parties
with pizza or cake, and that “more often than not, they would
intentionally trash the leftover food so it wouldn’t be edible [for
us].” A corrections officer in another state confirmed that this
is not an unusual occurrence: “There’s some staff that can be
vindictive and eat pizza or lunch right in front of inmates. There’s
definitely a difference between what we bring to work and what
they’re being fed. They see when we have our potlucks.”

PA R T 3 | F R O M T H E C H O W H A L L TO “ H O M E CO O K I N G ” I N P R I S O N

“Being served inedible
food in a chow hall
full of insects, being
told you have five
minutes to eat it with
your sweat dripping
into the food ... That
was truly horrific.”
— Rosa, incarcerated for 33 years

59

Not all prisons have central chow halls. As noted above, in some
facilities people eat in the communal dayroom of their housing
unit—a smaller space where the faces are mainly familiar, but not
free of tension and not necessarily pleasant. Despite the name,
there may be little or no natural light. As for people confined
to their cells—either temporarily as punishment or over the
long term in special housing units—their eating experience is
demeaning in a different way. Trays are often delivered through
a slot in the cell door, and meals are eaten sitting right next to the
odors and germs of the toilet. And of course, they have no choice
of dining companion, regardless of whether they are housed
individually or live with a cellmate.
Whether in dining halls, dayrooms, or cells, 85% percent of the
released people we surveyed indicated that the environment
where they ate breakfast, lunch, and dinner in prison was neither
“welcoming” nor “social”—things we expect in the places where
we eat food. As Rosa summed up, ”Being served inedible food
in a chow hall full of insects, being told you have five minutes
to eat it with your sweat dripping into the food because it’s not
air-conditioned, not being allowed to talk or trade for something
that somebody else doesn’t want ... That was truly horrific.”

Staff dining: not much better
The people who staff prisons obviously go home at the end of
their shift and have access to a much wider range of food in their
lives compared with incarcerated people. But at work they’re
often not eating well either. Rules, routines, and geography
can get in the way of healthy eating habits. Some facilities don’t
allow staff to bring their own food past the security checkpoint,
making that food less accessible during the short breaks in
their shift. And in rural areas where the prison is miles from
the nearest grocery store or restaurant, going out for food in
the middle of a shift is impossible. As a result, many prison
employees are reliant on the staff dining hall, where they
might be served the same unappealing, unhealthy food as the

PA R T 3 | F R O M T H E C H O W H A L L TO “ H O M E CO O K I N G ” I N P R I S O N

60

S TA F F DINING NE W

Staff dining in
U.S. prisons
Most states provide the same
meals to staff as incarcerated
people.

-

Same menu as
incarcerated people*

-

Staff meal provided,
different menu

-

No staff meal provided

-

No data available
* While the primary meal is the same
as what is served to incarcerated
people, staff in Washington, Illinois,
and Tennessee also have access to a
healthy alternative (i.e., salad bar or
grilled chicken).

residents, or fare that’s not much better. One corrections officer
described “constant weight gain” as part of the job.

Source: Impact Justice(2020).

The corrections staff we spoke with also described a significant
decline in food quality over the course of their careers, and
some of them no longer feel comfortable or safe eating the food
cooked on site. One corrections officer told us that the food in
her facility used to be good, explaining, “It was fresh, and the
cooks cared about what they put out.” Since a statewide shift to
centralized food production, however, she no longer eats the
meals provided, explaining, “Once or twice I tried, but I couldn’t
eat it. … It’s poor quality.” People told us they depend heavily on
snacks from vending machines to get them through the day.
Beyond the food itself, eating on the inside is a hurried,
uncomfortable experience, staff report. People said they don’t
have time to sit down to a meal and eat at a natural pace. One
former officer who worked in a Southern facility said that she
frequently skipped breakfast or lunch entirely because of the
heavy workload on a shift. We learned of one facility lacking a
designated lunch break for officers, who instead must carry a
lunch bag with them all day and grab bites when they can.

PA R T 3 | F R O M T H E C H O W H A L L TO “ H O M E CO O K I N G ” I N P R I S O N

t

While many people can’t afford to eat
from commissary, and the options
are mostly unhealthy, some of our
interviewees described positive and
meaningful memories associated with
cooking and eating with friends

61

‘Home cooking’ in prison
The counterpart to the generally tasteless (or worse) big batch
food prepared in prison kitchens are meals that incarcerated
people make for themselves and others with supplies purchased
at the facility commissary, known in some prisons as the
canteen. A typical commissary sells common snack foods
(e.g., candy bars, honey buns, cookies, chips), non-perishable
condiments (e.g., soy sauce and hot sauce), and some more
substantial packaged foods (e.g., macaroni and cheese, pouches
of tuna, tortillas, the ever-popular ramen noodle soups), as well
as basic toiletries, over-the-counter medications, extra clothing,
and postage stamps. While a commissary might stock a few
different varieties of especially popular items, in general brands
and options are extremely limited. We didn’t encounter any
facilities that offer fresh produce or other perishables like eggs
and milk in their commissary.

PA R T 3 | F R O M T H E C H O W H A L L TO “ H O M E CO O K I N G ” I N P R I S O N

Commissary Prices
This graphic shows how many
hours someone incarcerated in
the labeled state would need
to work in order to afford the
purchase listed.

Hawaii

$0.75

=

3 oz package
of chicken ramen

3 hrs

of work

If someone worked minimum wage
outside of prison, they could buy
close to 100 ramen packs with three
hours of work.

Minnesota

$7.92

8 oz Folgers
instant coffee

=

8 hrs

of work

Based on the average pay in the state.

Pennsylvania

$2.49

10 oz salted
mixed nuts

=

13 hrs
of work

For incarcerated people who at the low
end get paid $0.19 per hour.

62

Typically once a week, although in some prisons less often,
people with money in their accounts have the opportunity to
purchase a limited dollar amount of food and other items, either
by filling out a commissary form and waiting for delivery or
visiting the commissary window. Many facilities also permit
family members and friends to send packages to incarcerated
people through approved vendors whose catalogues feature
items similar to what the commissary stocks.
With what people can afford to buy at the commissary, and by
creatively using plastic garbage bags as mixing bowls, ID cards
as knives, an immersion heater in a bucket of water, and other
improvised devices, incarcerated people partake in culinary
rituals that echo those on the outside: cobbling together daily
comfort foods, preparing holiday fare, and laboring over special
desserts for birthdays and other celebrations. Many formerly
incarcerated people we surveyed and interviewed recalled these
“home-cooked” meals as some of the only positive moments
during their time in prison.
The sharing of food—taking in something that literally becomes
a part of us—can be a deeply symbolic act that affirms our
common humanity. And through food, we can communicate
without speaking: “I’m sorry,” “Feel better,” “I love you.” Aaron
remembered making a big spread of nachos with tortilla chips
and processed cheese to eat while watching the Super Bowl
inside prison. Rosa, a trans woman, recalled the time she and
some friends started purchasing ramen soups, chips, and other
items weeks in advance of Christmas to make a huge “pocket,” a
mash-up of savory snacks blended together in a trash bag. She
still feels the pride of being able to share that pocket with almost
80 men, many of whom couldn’t afford to purchase items from the
commissary.
Commissary items are not cheap. In some prisons, prices are
inflated compared to identical products in grocery stores.
But even if the price is the same, a $0.40 package of ramen is
expensive for someone earning $0.10 an hour at a prison job.

PA R T 3 | F R O M T H E C H O W H A L L TO “ H O M E CO O K I N G ” I N P R I S O N

63

Sample commissary list
CO
M MIS
S Apage
RY LI
(SH Othe
R TE
N E D )Correctional
3
This
is one
ofST
14 from
Kansas
Industries Commissary Menu
Source: Kansas Department of Corrections. (2019) Kansas Correctional Industries
Commissary Menu. Topeka, KS: Kansas Department of Corrections.

KANSAS CORRECTIONAL INDUSTRIES COMMISSARY MENU
TOPEKA CORRECTIONAL FACILITY COMBINED MENU
G=GEN. POPULATION, A=ADMIN. SEG. D=DISC. SEG
R=GEN. RESTRICTION, Z=LEVEL "0"
CANTEEN PRICE DOES NOT INCLUDE SALES TAX @9.15%
SUGAR SALT K/H
GROCERIES
ITEM ,_ _ J _
__________
_

6586
6614
6618
6623
6630
6637
6639
6645
6655
6686
6693
6697
6715
6830
6831
6836
6848
6868
6874
6550
6912
6925
6933
6939
6941
6943
6996
6997
6552
6749
6756
6761
6266
6267
6992
7005
7007
7020
7026
7542
7440
7447

SIZE

“Z”
“R” I“D” I“A” I“G” PRICE -

MEATS - SEAFOOD
11.25 OZ $2.19
BACK COUNTRY BEEF STEW
$3.95
8 OZ
COMAL SHREDDED CHICKEN w/ GREEN SAUCE
$3.30
4 OZ
BACK COUNTRY BEEF BURGER
$3.84
H 7 OZ
PANCHO'S CANTINA SHREDDED BEEF
$4.00
10 OZ
RIP N READY MEATBALLS IN TOMATO SAUCE
11.25 OZ $2.60
BACK COUNTRY TACO FILLING
4.5 OZ $2.50
SIAM CHINESE PORK SAUSAGE
$1.84
3 OZ
HORMEL SPAM CLASSIC SINGLE
4.5 OZ $2.30
BACK COUNTRY PREMIUM CHICKEN WHITE MEAT IN A POUCH
$1.74
5 OZ
LEGENDARY MEAT SNACKS HOT BEEF SUMMER SAUSAGE
$1.66
5 OZ
LEGENDARY MEAT SNACKS BEEF SALAMI
3.5 OZ $1.86
BACK COUNTRY PEPPERONI PRE SLICED
1.125 OZ $0.60
O'BRIEN'S HOT SHOTS MEAT SNACKS
K/H 3.53 OZ $2.04
LOW
FISHERMAN'S PARADISE LIGHT TUNA w/ DICED JALAPENOS
K/H 3.53 OZ $1.98
FISHERMAN'S PARADISE FRIED CATFISH IN SOUTHERN SAUCE
K/H 3.53 OZ $1.58
FISHERMAN'S PARADISE MACKEREL FILLET IN OIL
K/H 3.53 OZ $0.94
FISHERMAN'S PARADISE SARDINES IN OIL
$2.28
3 OZ
FISHERMAN'S PARADISE SMOKED OYSTERS
K/H 3.53 OZ $0.93
FISHERMAN'S PARADISE FISH STEAKS IN LOUISIANA HOT SAUCE
SOUP - PASTA - TORTILLA
7.25 OZ $0.73
K
HOSPITALITY MACARONI & CHEESE DINNER
2.25 OZ $0.65
NO
NISSIN BEEF CUP - Combined Limit 30
16 OZ $1.34
LOW NO K
ALLEGRA ANGEL HAIR PASTA - Combined Limit 30
$0.33
3 OZ
H
DRAGON EXPRESS SPICY VEGETABLE RAMEN - Combined Limit 30
$0.29
3 OZ
NISSIN CHILI RAMEN - Combined Limit 30
$0.29
3 OZ
NISSIN CHICKEN RAMEN - CLEAR - Combined Limit 30
$0.29
3 OZ
NISSIN ORIENTAL RAMEN - Combined Limit 30
LOW LOW K/H 7.8 OZ $1.05
WHEAT TORTILLA 6 CT
LOW LOW K/H 7.8 OZ $1.00
BUTTER TORTILLA 6 CT
VEGETABLES
HOSPITALITY INSTANT MASHED POTATOES
TEXAS TITO'S BIG FAT JUICY DILL PICKLE K
EL PATO SLICED JALAPENO WHEELS PLASTIC JAR
STAR SPANISH OLIVES STUFFED WITH MINCED PIMIENTO
SWEETENER
SWEETMATE PACKET - BLUE - ASPARTAME
SWEETMATE PACKET - PINK - SACCHARIN
POPCORN - NUTS - TRAIL MIX
MR. NATURE PEANUTS ROASTED & SALTED
ACT II BUTTER LOVERS POPCORN
ACT II KETTLE CORN
KAR'S MIXED NUTS WITH PEANUTS
KAR'S SUNFLOWER KERNELS
KAR'S ALL ENERGY TRAIL MIX
PROTEIN BARS
PROMAX CHOCOLATE PEANUT CRUNCH BAR
PROMAX DOUBLE FUDGE BROWNIE BAR

ATTN: Combined Max 4 pair of shoes equals: 1 pair
of shoes, 1 pair of sandals, and 2 pairs of boots.

K
K

NO
NO
NO

K=Kosher, H=Halal

13.3 OZ
6 OZ
12 OZ
2.5 OZ

A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
+
A
G
A
G
G t A
G I A
A
G
A
G
t
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
G TA
A
G

r

$2.86 G
$0.77 G
$1.64 G
$1.95 G

100 CT $1.85 G
100 CT $1.85 G

LOW
LOW

$0.75
$0.64
$0.61
$3.90
$0.79
$0.92

G
G
G
G
G
G

K
K
K
K
K
K

3.5 OZ
2.75 OZ
2.75 OZ
10 OZ
2 OZ
2 OZ

K
K

2.64 OZ $1.48 G
2.64 OZ $1.48 G

A
A
A
A

+

A

TA

f
L

t

t
t
r
t

+AA L

t AA L
A

TA

t

t

A I
A

Page 2 of 14

PA R T 3 | F R O M T H E C H O W H A L L TO “ H O M E CO O K I N G ” I N P R I S O N

Canteen Tools
Incarcerated people use accessible
items to prepare meals.

ID card

=

Knife

Chip bag

=

Mixing bowl

Toilet

=

Refrigerator

Hair dryer

=

Oven

60%

of survey respondents
said they could not afford
commissary purchases

64

Corrections officials told us that inflated commissary prices
are indispensable because the profits pay for things like gym
equipment, educational programming, and other resources for
incarcerated people that otherwise might not be funded.
Three-fifths of the formerly incarcerated people we surveyed
said they could not afford commissary purchases, and 75%
reported that access to food, including commissary items, was
limited by their own or their family’s finances. Many people have
to choose between buying food and purchasing necessities such
as toothpaste, tampons, and ibuprofen, or they go without extra
food so they can make expensive phone calls to loved ones.59
We heard stories of people so desperate for palatable food
that they would trade sex for commissary items, form romantic
relationships with others who could afford to shop at the
commissary, or get involved in gang activity when commissary
items were a reward. As one formerly incarcerated person said,
“If you didn’t cook … you starved.” One’s ability to participate
in the informal prison economy also depends upon their ability
to buy commissary items. Ramen soups are one of the popular
forms of currency, for example, and are often used to “purchase”
goods and services (such as homemade food items or bunk
cleaning) from fellow residents.60
According to our surveys and interviews, people who could
afford weekly trips to the commissary, thanks to support from
loved ones on the outside, opted to skip the chow hall as often
as possible. The packaged food they bought seemed safer and
tasted better than the meals the prison provided. While cooking
in prison with items purchased from the commissary has gained
attention as a form of creative resistance to the depersonalization
of prison, it doesn’t improve access to healthy food.61 Most of
what’s available for purchase is ultra-processed, filled with
preservatives, and high in carbohydrates, salt, and sugar.
Although many frontline staff in prisons and some corrections
leaders assert that incarcerated people “only want to eat junk
food,” our examination suggests that the poor quality of items
for sale in the commissary is a big concern to incarcerated

PA R T 3 | F R O M T H E C H O W H A L L TO “ H O M E CO O K I N G ” I N P R I S O N

Many people want
healthier options, but
when they inquire
about stocking fresh
fruits and vegetables
they are told that it’s
impossible to safely
store such items.

65

people. Many people want healthier options, but when they
inquire about stocking fresh fruits and vegetables they are told
that it’s impossible to safely store such items and that healthier
non-perishable foods would be so expensive that no one would
buy them. During her time served in a West Coast facility, Alicia
surveyed her peers about canteen inventory preferences on
multiple occasions, gathering more than 1500 responses. But
after compiling all that data and writing up a summary for the
canteen manager, she was informed that the manager didn’t
have time to adjust the canteen product list.
The widespread belief that people in prison want only junk
food is rooted in racist and classist stereotypes that Black and
brown people, as well as people of any race from low-income
communities, prefer unhealthy food.62 When high-priced
nuts, dried fruit, and the few healthier items commissaries
occasionally stock don’t sell, it seems to confirm this myth, but
our research suggests that most incarcerated people simply
can’t afford them.

AN ARGUMENT
FOR INCUBATOR
KITCHENS

•
•
•
•

COMMISSARY

PROGR AMMING

VISITATION

REENTRY

Some people turn cooking in prison into a thriving enterprise,
albeit one that operates unauthorized by corrections staff.
Longing for healthy, protein-rich snacks while serving time in a
federal facility in California, former NBA basketball player Seth
Sundberg concocted protein bars out of oatmeal, peanut butter,
and nuts he purchased from the commissary. Before long, the
bars were in high demand on the prison yard.
After his release, Sundberg started Inside Out Goodness, a
company that makes probiotic- and protein-packed snack
bars for sale to the public. Sundberg is trying to persuade
commissary supply companies to distribute the bars as a
healthier alternative to most of what’s sold inside prisons. There
are numerous stories of creative individuals like Seth who fill a
need for tasty food on the inside. Instead of suppressing their

PA R T 3 | F R O M T H E C H O W H A L L TO “ H O M E CO O K I N G ” I N P R I S O N

66

hard work and contributions as illicit activities, why not sanction and support them
by creating kitchen incubators inside prisons that give incarcerated people the space,
equipment, and encouragement to exercise their culinary and business skills?
In a similar vein, prison restaurants open to the public, such as the Fife and Drum at
Northeastern Correctional Center in Concord, Massachusetts, provide opportunities
for culinary trainees to take pride in serving food made with care to others while rehumanizing incarcerated people in the eyes of the outside world. InGalera, a fine-dining
restaurant at Bollate Prison in Milan, Italy, offers a space for its incarcerated staff to
practice their culinary skills and interact with the public. It’s run by a chefs’ cooperative,
expanding the program’s capacity to empower participants with business knowledge and
self-confidence to prepare them for their return to the community. Could these programs
be expanded to include an in-facility restaurant where incarcerated people could spend
their commissary dollars on well-prepared food while supporting their peers, or a café
where families could purchase appetizing meals to share during visitation?

Food and family

In most visitation areas
the only food available
is from vending
machines stocked with
unappealing, unhealthy,
and overpriced snacks.

There is another place and time in prison where food plays a role
in the life of an incarcerated person: during family visits. In life
on the outside, members of a family routinely connect over food—
from nightly dinners to elaborate holiday meals. When people
visit a loved one in prison, sometimes traveling great distances,
it is a special occasion, one that a shared meal would greatly
enhance. Unfortunately, in most prisons visitors are not allowed
to bring outside food into the facility, and the few exceptions to
that rule can have strict and confusing limitations.63
In most visitation areas the only food available is from vending
machines stocked with unappealing, unhealthy, and overpriced
snacks. “There were chips, honey buns, sometimes sandwiches
your family could buy and heat up in the microwave, but there
was no telling how long they’d been sitting there,” or if the
vending machine would be working, Rosa recalled. The whole
experience, she said, could end up becoming just another source
of disappointment, guilt, or shame.

PA R T 3 | F R O M T H E C H O W H A L L TO “ H O M E CO O K I N G ” I N P R I S O N

A RE AL FAMILY
DINNER

•
•

VISITATION

REENTRY

67

Some corrections leaders recognize that family meals can play
an important role in the lives of people while they’re in prison.
Annette Chambers-Smith, Director of the Ohio Department of
Rehabilitation and Correction, believes that “sitting down at
a table with food and having conversation is what maintains
healthy relationships.” When Tim Buchanan, then warden of
Noble Correctional Institution in Caldwell, suggested holding a
cookout for soon-to-be-released individuals and their families,
Chambers-Smith applauded the idea.
In September 2019, Buchanan invited relatives of five incarcerated
men to an outdoor lunch they would prepare and eat together. As
partners, children, parents, and siblings joined their incarcerated
loved ones to grill, eat, and clean up, the experience strengthened
their relationships. Pleased with the success of the inaugural
cookout, Buchanan hopes it will be repeated.
Chambers-Smith sees this cookout as just the beginning. She
envisions trailers for families to come together for an entire day,
cooking meals together, cleaning up afterwards, just enjoying
one another’s company, and “Grandma can show you how to
make that strudel or whatever the case may be.” Providing an
opportunity to come together regularly with loved ones over
a meal is a practice that could be widely adopted. Sustaining
strong connections between incarcerated people and their
families can boost well-being for both parties, and maintaining
such connections has been shown to reduce rates of recidivism
after release.64

Incarcerated individuals and their families deserve more
than sodas and overpriced chips during the time they have
together. Affordable, healthy meals should be available during
visitation. Likewise, creating a pleasant, cafe-like atmosphere
in the visitation room would increase a sense of normalcy and
dignity. Activities like parent-child cooking classes could also
strengthen family bonds and provide an opportunity to reinforce
healthy eating practices.

PA R T 3 | F R O M T H E C H O W H A L L TO “ H O M E CO O K I N G ” I N P R I S O N

68

“Everything in prison revolves around food”

The fundamental
human urge to offer
support and comfort
through food persists
inside the prison gates.

One of the many ironies of prison is that in an institution where
the food is generally awful, food is still at the center of life.
“Everything in prison revolves around food,” Alicia emphasized.
In a bleak, regimented environment where both boredom and
tension reign, mealtimes break the monotony and structure the
day. For better and worse, food is woven into the tribulations and
tiny respites of life behind bars. It is taken, given, traded, and
occasionally savored. Michelle still thinks about her birthday in
prison when a few friends threw her a surprise party with a cake
made of pudding stolen from the kitchen and crushed cookies
from the commissary.
For a time while Alicia was incarcerated, she ran an
unsanctioned business cooking and selling churros and other
desserts, for which the other women eagerly traded their own
practical services and commissary goods. “Food brings people
together,” she said. The fundamental human urge to offer
support and comfort through food persists inside the prison
gates, Alicia reminded us: “When someone is sick, you want to
bring them soup; when someone is sad you want to bring them
cake.” Food takes its usual place in the rituals of mourning
and celebrating those who have passed on. On June 22, 2020,
Michael Thompson, Robert Cannon, Jr., Parker Sineora, and
William Welch—all incarcerated at the Muskegon Correctional
Facility in Michigan—spent hours preparing an elaborate,
physically-distanced meal for 50 of their peers to honor the
lives of George Floyd and countless others lost to police
brutality.65 Thompson reflected, “We are not allowed to protest.
However, food has a way of bringing about three words, Love,
Peace, and Happiness.”
NEXT UP
PART 4: THE PRISON FOOD MACHINE

In the next installment of Eating Behind Bars, we look behind
the scenes at the operational policies and practices that
determine the quality of food in prison.

I
I
I
I
I
I
I

INTRO
PART 1
PART 2
PART 3
PART 4
PART 5
PART 6

PART 4

The Prison
Food Machine
“Food service is the most important. You can skip other
services for a day—visitation, mail, etc. Try skipping food
service for a day.”
— food services director

The first three segments of Eating Behind Bars detail the prison food
experience from the perspective of the eater. In this installment, we look
behind the scenes at the policies and practices that determine the quality
of breakfast, lunch, and dinner for nearly 1.3 million people incarcerated
in state prisons, the institutional focus of this report.
For change to occur, advocates need to understand where decisions are made,
what factors are taken into account, and what policies are currently in place. As one
corrections leader told us, “It’s very difficult in prisons to change things if you’ve never
worked in them or don’t understand how they work.”

PA R T 4 | T H E P R I S O N F O O D M AC H I N E

It’s important to note
that in food service, as
in all other aspects of
correctional practices,
states operate
autonomously, with no
two exactly alike.

70

Those policies and practices encompass nutritional standards
and menu planning, procurement of food (i.e., buying in bulk),
preparation of meals in prison kitchens relying heavily on
labor by incarcerated people, and in some states, the decision
to contract with private companies to handle many aspects
of food service. It’s important to note that in food service, as
in all other aspects of correctional practices, states operate
autonomously, with no two exactly alike. Nevertheless, in our
exploration we found considerable overlap in food service
policies and practices, in part because states look to one another
for guidance and consider standards issued by the American
Correctional Association.66

‘Cooking’ from the top down
Decades ago, when there were far fewer Americans
incarcerated, individual prisons controlled most or all aspects of
food service. Formerly incarcerated people and long-time staff
described to us how head cooks planned menus featuring locally
available ingredients and foods that reflected regional cuisine,
and oversaw kitchens in which dishes were cooked largely
from scratch. The food wasn’t good, or even decent, in every
prison; it wasn’t consistent from day to day and it wasn’t always
as nourishing as it should have been. Still, meals were more
likely to resemble what people might eat at home. Under mass
incarceration, by contrast, the food served to most incarcerated
people is produced on an industrial scale, sometimes far from
where it’s eaten.
Nowadays, state corrections officials control most of the
process, from developing statewide menus (typically in
consultation with a dietitian) to sourcing much of the food.67
(For an example of a comprehensive food service policy, see the
Alaska Department of Corrections.68)

PA R T 4 | T H E P R I S O N F O O D M AC H I N E

71

State prison food
service roles
While there is variation from
state to state, this diagram
represents a common
breakdown of roles and
responsibilities between state
and facility-level staff.

CORRECTIONAL AGENCIES
A correctional agency is the department that
oversees incarceration across a given jurisdiction.
In this report, we are focused on state agencies.
E.g., Wyoming Department of Corrections

LEADER OF THE AGENCY
I.e., Director, Commissioner,
Secretary

CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES
A correctional facility is the individual site
where people are incarcerated. Under a state
agency, these are usually prisons.
E.g., Wyoming State Penitentiary

FOOD SERVICES DIRECTOR
The food services director
generally oversees:
Menu planning
Kitchen inspections
Setting nutritional policy
(including special diets)
Procurement for non-perishables
A staff dietitian who contributes to
writing and approving menus

FOOD SERVICES MANAGER

WARDEN

The food services manager
generally oversees:

The warden generally oversees:

Recipe selection
Procurement of perishables
Overall kitchen management,
which includes cooking and
distributing meals

Timing/duration of meals
Hiring of food services manager
and civilian kitchen staff
Rules and regulations for the
chow hall
Rules and regulations for
commissary/canteen
Partnerships and programs
(garden initiatives, culinary
training, etc.)

In most states, meal standardization is the goal. Menus are
designed to serve the largest number of incarcerated people
across facilities with minimum modifications. The food tends
to be bland—some describe it as tasteless—so that, in theory, it
will be suitable for everyone, although in reality it often doesn’t
appeal to anyone. Some states have taken to serving everyone
a low-sodium, “heart-healthy” meal to reduce the number of
medical meals needed.
While centralizing at least some aspects of correctional
food service can have advantages—and some state agencies
handle the process better than others—if standardization and
cost-cutting are the driving considerations, low-quality food
will likely be the result. Some of the corrections officials we

PA R T 4 | T H E P R I S O N F O O D M AC H I N E

72

interviewed, as well as some formerly incarcerated people we
surveyed, have observed a troubling decline in food quality as
the process has become more centralized and rigid. While the
total spending on food service rose with the growth in prison
populations, states now typically spend far less in real dollars
to feed each incarcerated person (see “Historical daily amount
spent on prison food per person,” page 86).

Ultra-processed: how prison policies deplete nutrition

When a registered
dietitian is involved
in the process,
that professional’s
approval may
function more like a
rubber stamp than a
genuine endorsement.

Chili served over macaroni, two slices of white bread with a
pat of margarine, peas, a scoop of canned fruit, a square of
chocolate cake for dessert, and a powdered vitamin beverage to
mix with water: it’s familiar fare, served as often as once a week.
Every item comes from a can, box, or bag. Prisons’ reliance on
ultra-processed, pre-made foods (e.g., breaded chicken patties
or instant mashed potatoes) prepared by large manufacturers
such as Sysco is now common because they can be heated
and ready to serve quickly in the significant number of prison
kitchens where equipment is limited to ovens and steam kettles
and staff might not have even basic culinary skills.
A typical prison meal, like the one described above, was planned
months or even years ago by the state agency’s head of food
services to be served on a rotating basis in prisons statewide.
It’s designed to supply the required calories and nutrients, but
nothing more. When a registered dietitian is involved in the
process, that professional’s approval may function more like
a rubber stamp than a genuine endorsement. One dietitian
described her role as ensuring that menus comply with the
agency’s own policies, even if she doesn’t fully agree with them.
“I write disclaimers such as ‘The fiber is lower than desired,’”
she told us, and “I sign off on menus that don’t include fruit,
which doesn’t make me happy.” Other dietitians working in
corrections also told us they wish prison meals included more
fresh fruits and vegetables instead of relying on fortified
powdered beverages to supply essential nutrients, and had
fewer carbohydrates, which is the least expensive way to reach
the required calorie count.

PA R T 4 | T H E P R I S O N F O O D M AC H I N E

While many state
agencies are in
compliance with their
own standards, the
standards themselves
do not necessarily
align with wellregarded dietary
recommendations.

73

Our own investigation suggests that nutritional policies
developed by state correctional agencies range from the vague
(meals will be “nutritionally adequate”) to the highly specific
(e.g., two cups of fluid milk per day). While many state agencies
are in compliance with their own standards, the standards
themselves do not necessarily align with well-regarded dietary
recommendations. This includes governmental guidelines that
many correctional policies originate from, such as the USDA’s
Dietary Guidelines for Americans and the Dietary Reference
Intakes issued by the National Academy of Sciences. The toplevel advice from each of these agencies is clear: a healthy
diet focuses on consuming a variety of nutrient-dense foods
including vegetables, fruits, whole grains, seafood, eggs,
beans and peas, nuts and seeds, and some dairy and meat
products—prepared with little or no added solid fats, sugars,
refined starches, and sodium.69 USDA’s MyPlate recommends
that half the plate be filled with vegetables and fruit, and offers
personalized serving recommendations based on age, sex,
weight, height, and level of physical activity.
Rather than looking at the food itself, correctional agencies
generally focus on hitting minimum nutrient amounts over
the course of a day or throughout the week. For example,
meals provided by the Florida Department of Corrections
contain 2,691 calories a day on average, using a “4-week cycle
master menu that meets the Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs)
established by the Food and Nutrition Board of the National
Academy of Sciences.”70 While this approach may appear to meet
professional recommendations, in practice it flouts the most
basic dietary and nutrition guidance. “Comparing trays” below
contrasts a tray with standard prison fare and a tray that follows
the USDA’s MyPlate proportion recommendations.
Several corrections officials we spoke with reason that people
outside of prison tend to eat much more protein, for example,
than they actually need. But there’s no denying that prison meals
lack nutritional balance. As discussed previously in this series
(see Part 2), only a small proportion of the food on a typical

PA R T 4 | T H E P R I S O N F O O D M AC H I N E

74

CO M PARI N G TR AYS
CO M PARI N G TR AYS

Comparing trays

ME

Comparing Trays
A typical prison tray (top) is high
in refined carbohydrates
and low in produce.
Comparing
Trays

ME

A typical prison tray (top image) is high in refined carbohydrates and low in fresh
The tray
below depicts a meal we’ve designed to align with the USDA’s MyPlate
produce.
traytray
to the
right
depicts
a meal
we’ve designed
to align
with
the
A typicalThe
prison
(top
image)
is high
in refined
carbohydrates
and
low
in USDA’s
fresh
guidelines,
includingright
vegetables
and fruit
at least
halfwith
the
tray.
MyPlate
vegetables
and filling
fruit
filling
at
the
produce. Theguidelines,
tray to theincluding
depicts
a meal we’ve
designed
to least
align half
thetray.
USDA’s
MyPlate guidelines, including vegetables and fruit filling at least half the tray.

TYPICAL PRISON TRAY

A TYPICAL PRISON TRAY
A TYPICAL PRISON TRAY
YELLOW CAKE

BISCUITS

YELLOW CAKE

BISCUITS

APPLE
APPLE
MARGARINE
MARGARINE
BROCCOLI
BROCCOLI
TURKEY
ALA
KING
TURKEY
ALA KING
POWDERED
DRINK MIX
POWDERED
DRINK MIX

USDA’S MYPLATE
GUIDELINES
USDA’S
MYPL ATE
USDA’S MYPLATE GUIDELINES

GREEN SALAD
GREEN SALAD

SAUTEED MIXED
VEGETABLES
SAUTEED
MIXED
VEGETABLES

GUIDELINES

PEACH
PEACH

ROAST CHICKEN
ROAST CHICKEN

PLAIN YOGURT
WITHPLAIN
BLUEBERRIES
YOGURT
WITH BLUEBERRIES

BROWN RICE
BROWN RICE

PA R T 4 | T H E P R I S O N F O O D M AC H I N E

75

prison meal tray contains essential nutrients and the minimum
requirements are often met by adding a fortified beverage; the
remaining calories are provided in the cheapest way, with carbs.
Moreover, as we also highlighted in Part 2, agencies calibrate their
minimum nutrient requirements to meet the most basic needs of
the “average” person. By definition, that means that people with
higher nutrient needs are not getting sufficient nourishment.

The sheer number
of people in prison
means that recipes
must be easily scaled
to efficiently feed
hundreds, if not
thousands, of people
over the course of a
single meal.

Menus are also shaped by factors that have nothing to do with
nutrition. Most notably, the sheer number of people in prison
means that recipes must be easily scaled to efficiently feed
hundreds, if not thousands, of people over the course of a single
meal. For this reason, many recipes come from the Armed
Forces Recipe Service. They must also be feasible to prepare in
prison kitchens with limited or outdated equipment. Storage is
another concern, since many facilities don’t have the space to
hold large quantities of fresh produce.
Corrections officials also consider whether particular foods pose
security concerns. Bone-in cuts of meat, whole stone fruits, hot
peppers, and other foods that could be made into weapons are
prohibited in some prisons. Views on this subject are far from
uniform, however. While many prisons sharply limit or in rare
cases completely exclude fresh fruit because it can be fermented
into alcohol, for example, one food service manager we
interviewed scoffed at the idea of banning fruit when bread can
easily be turned into alcohol and is widely available. What’s clear
is that eliminating specific foods for legitimate safety reasons is
not at odds with serving meals that are nutritious and palatable.

Sourcing ingredients
State correctional agencies generally purchase much of the food
served in prisons, following their own procurement policies.
Some agencies adhere to a strict competitive bidding process in
selecting vendors—seeking the lowest-priced goods that meet
their requirements—while other agencies encourage purchasing
local products and buying from minority-owned or women-

PA R T 4 | T H E P R I S O N F O O D M AC H I N E

76

A brief history of prison
food in the United States72

18th century
In his 1777 treatise, English reformist John Howard
prescribes a diet that’s simple but healthful and
sufficient in amount to aid rehabilitation—but in practice
food is considered part of a person’s punishment and is
generally scarce and awful, both in English prisons and
in newly created prisons in the United States.

Early 20th century
The emerging science of nutrition leads to a more
diversified diet and standard portions in many prisons.
Prison plantations (large farms worked by incarcerated
people for little or no pay) spread across the South—a
practice that continues to serve as a source of food for
prisons today—as convict leasing is phased out.

-

1970s

Toward the middle of the decade, the shift to a punitive
mindset emphasizing retribution over rehabilitation
coincides with the beginning of mass incarceration and
the routine dehumanization of incarcerated people.
State departments of correction begin to centralize
food procurement and menu planning to follow
nutritional guidelines and control costs.

19th century
People in prison are often malnourished and served food that
is bland or spoiled, and some get merely bread and water until
they earn the right to more food. The practice of convict leasing
peaks around 1880—a system under which incarcerated people
(overwhelmingly Black men) are worked and starved to death by
private businesses that profit from their labor.

Mid 20th century
Individual prisons have near complete control over what to buy,
cook, and serve, with quality ranging from meals that are relatively
good—in the otherwise notorious Alcatraz prison, for example—to
those that are inedible. Instead of withholding food, prisons are
more likely to intentionally overfeed people to make them lethargic
and docile, and more compliant.

Late 20th century to present
With well over one million people to feed every day, state prison
systems allocate fewer resources per person, rely heavily or
exclusively on factory-produced and ultra-processed food, and
in many cases outsource food service to large corporations—
policies and practices that produce the declines in food quality,
quantity, and essential nutrition that are documented in this
series. Poor nutrition and a degrading relationship with food
compromise the health and well-being of individuals while they’re
incarcerated and often long after their release, consequences
that disproportionately affect people of color and the low-income
communities to which they return.

+-

A formal meal set up at
Alcatraz Prison in California
Source: National Park Service

PA R T 4 | T H E P R I S O N F O O D M AC H I N E

t

The right side shows what you will find
in a typical prison walk-in fridge: lots of
processed and packaged carbs, meats,
and produce. The left side shows more
whole foods, similar to what you would
expect to see in a restaurant walk-in that
prepares meals from scratch

MENU PL ANNING &
ME AL PREPAR ATION

•

77

owned businesses, also at a competitive price. Agencies have
leeway to participate in “special buys” or deals outside of their
contracts with approved vendors—frozen apple pies made for
McDonald’s that are too big for the sleeve and sold at a deep
discount, for example. Most state correctional agencies procure
dry goods and frozen items for all facilities statewide, using their
purchasing power to buy in bulk at low prices. They rely on food
service managers in each facility to order smaller quantities of
fruit, vegetables, dairy and other perishables on a weekly basis.
Small gardens exist in prisons around the country, but with just
a few exceptions, they don’t necessarily lead to fresher, better
meals. In some states, facility food service managers can decide
how to use garden produce in the kitchens they oversee—maybe
preparing a fresh salad to accompany lunch or adding flavorful
herbs to the evening spaghetti sauce. The Texas Department
of Criminal Justice, for example, has been operating a unique
program called Herbs Behind Bars since 2007. Nearly 60
facilities across the state create and maintain herb gardens that
provide fresh cilantro, basil, garlic, oregano, and other herbs
for their meal service. Each year there is a competition between
units that engenders a sense of pride for all involved, and has
reportedly led to better-tasting food.71 Other states don’t allow
correctional facilities to serve any fruits or vegetables that
haven’t gone through a formalized inspection process, however,
and many gardens don’t yield a harvest large enough to prepare
a dish to serve the whole facility.

PA R T 4 | T H E P R I S O N F O O D M AC H I N E

A history rooted
in slavery

In 2017, incarcerated
people in Texas:

78

There are states where the prison system produces vast
quantities of its own food on large farms run almost exclusively
with incarcerated labor. According to an article published in Civil
Eats, in 2017 incarcerated men and women in Texas raised 30
crops that produced more than 11.7 million pounds of food.

Harvested

Produced

123.7M POUNDS

11.7M POUNDS

of cotton, grains, grasses

of food

Canned

Processed

297,143 CA SES

22.7M POUNDS

of vegetables

of meat

Produced

5M EGGS
from chickens
they tended

The state “operates its own miniature food system that feeds
people who are incarcerated there (the Texas Department of
Criminal Justice boasts about being ‘self-sufficient’) as well
as commercial sales of food to the public.”73 Agribusiness sites
administered by the Virginia Department of Corrections and
dairy farms run by the state correctional agency in Wisconsin
also use what they produce in at least some prisons statewide.
In Virginia, for example, prison gardens and greenhouses
provide copious quantities of fresh lettuce, tomatoes, and
other produce directly to facility kitchens during the growing
season, and the DOC operates its own flash-freeze plant to
ensure a steady supply of vegetables throughout the year. The
state’s correctional facilities also feature dairy and beef cattle
operations, apple orchards, and a tilapia farm.
There are, however, historical injustices to consider. The system
in Texas, as in many other states, stems from the legacy of
convict leasing, a practice that proliferated after the Civil

PA R T 4 | T H E P R I S O N F O O D M AC H I N E

War as an extension of slavery. Convict leasing allowed prisons to provide the labor
predominantly of Black men to private companies, including plantations, in “one of the
harshest and most exploitative labor systems known in American history.”74 This was
a highly common—and for states profitable—form of racial oppression and violence. In
1898, almost 75% of Alabama’s entire state annual revenue came from convict leasing.75
Although Texas legally ended the practice in 1910 (it was outlawed nationally in 1941),
today, according to Civil Eats, “some of those former plantations make up the 130,000
agricultural acres currently maintained and operated by the Texas Department of
Criminal Justice.” The 13th Amendment abolishing slavery makes a notable exception
for “punishment of a crime,” which is still exploited today. When one member of the “Hoe
Squad” at Cummins Unit, a prison farm in Arkansas, asked an officer why they continued
to use garden tools rather than modern farming technology, the officer replied, “We don’t
want your brain. We want your back.”76
Jobs working the land are considered one of the more appealing assignments in many
prisons because they offer time outdoors and because growing food can feel more
purposeful than other available options. But it’s hard labor with only nominal wages—and
in at least seven states, no pay at all. Compelling incarcerated people to work large farms
without fair financial compensation is an injustice of its own, but in Arkansas, Indiana,
and other states they don’t even get to eat what they grow. These prison farms are solely
revenue-generating enterprises. The correctional agency sells what the farm produces,
purchasing canned vegetables and food of lower quality to serve in prison. Members of
the “Hoe Squad” grow cucumbers by the bushel, but may go years without tasting one.
Instead, one incarcerated person who works in the prison’s kitchen described pouring
cans of vegetables into a 55 gallon pot and stirring them with a “boat paddle.”77 A former
food services manager at a facility in another Southern state described something
similar, telling us, “We used to have a cattle ranch for Grade A meat, and we sold that off.
We purchased Grade B meat [to serve in the prison].”

+-

Men work the fields of the Ferguson
Unit’s prison farm in 1997 in Midway, Texas
Source: Getty Images

79

PA R T 4 | T H E P R I S O N F O O D M AC H I N E

80

FARM P R O D U C TI O N

Farm Production

Yes, Don’t Know

Prison food production
across the U.S.

Yes, Used in Meals
No Production
No Data

Many states still grow or produce food
using prison labor today. Whether or
not incarcerated people get to eat the
food produced varies widely.
Source: Impact Justice(2020).

-

Farm production, no confirmed
use in meals
States with farm production,
and used in meals

Managing the kitchen: who calls the shots?

No production
No data available

The balance of power between the head of food services for
a state correctional agency and facility-based food service
managers varies. In some states, the food services director holds
nearly all the power over what ends up on each tray. Such an
agency might prohibit even minor modifications such as adding
extra spices. Corrections leaders defend this approach as a way to
ensure uniform food quality across facilities, but uniform doesn’t
equal good.
Fifteen states reported in our survey that their facility-based
food service managers have a voice in the menu planning
process, and some have even more discretion. During our inquiry
we encountered a few highly dedicated facility food service
managers who take advantage of this flexibility to create their
own flavorful recipes or incorporate seasonal vegetables, using
state menus as more of a guide. At the leading edge of better
practice, the Maine Department of Corrections gives some facility
food service managers considerable control over menu planning
and food purchasing in consultation with the department’s
contracted dietitian, greatly improving the quality of ingredients
and of meals overall (see “Buying locally and cooking from
scratch”). This is perhaps easier to do in Maine, a state that
operates one of the smallest prison systems in the country with
just six facilities holding roughly 3,000 people total.
Regardless of how much influence facility-based food service
managers have in menu planning and procurement, their primary
role is to oversee the prison kitchen.

PA R T 4 | T H E P R I S O N F O O D M AC H I N E

BUYING
LOCALLY AND
COOKING FROM
SCR ATCH

•
•

PROCUREMENT

MENU PL ANNING &
ME AL PREPAR ATION

81

Mark McBrine, the food service manager at Mountain View
Correctional Facility in Maine, has spent years cultivating
relationships with local producers to source grains, dairy, eggs,
and other products at a mutually agreeable cost. McBrine, who
believes that “food can be medicine or it can be poison,” invests
time in teaching his kitchen staff how to cook and bake from
scratch, and shares his original recipes and ideas with food
service managers in Maine’s other prisons.
An organic farmer himself and veteran of the hospitality industry,
McBrine’s work demonstrates that a willingness to innovate
and advocate for better food not only benefits people in prison,
boosting health and morale, but also pays off economically.
For the last three years, Mountain View’s kitchen has averaged
over 30% local food purchases while coming in more than
$100,000 under budget. The practices McBrine pioneered align
with Commissioner Randall Liberty’s recent commitment to
source 20% of all food purchased by the Maine Department of
Corrections from local producers by 2025.78
When the COVID-19 pandemic hit, McBrine immediately reached
out to local producers who would normally sell their goods
to restaurants, and negotiated the purchase of high-quality
meat, poultry, and vegetables. While other facilities around the
country struggled to maintain regular meal service and safe
dining options, Mountain View’s residents ate dishes like roasted
turkey, heirloom carrots, and homemade morning glory muffins
in physically-distanced rotations.
In other states, efforts to increase access to fresh, local food
have begun to include correctional agencies. Through The
Common Market, a nonprofit regional food distributor, small
farms that on their own can’t win competitive bidding are
brought together as viable contenders. They successfully
won a contract to provide fresh eggs to a number of prisons in
New York. Farm to Institution New England (FINE), a six-state
network of non-profit, public, and private entities working to
transform the region’s food system, has expanded beyond the
K-12, college, and healthcare sectors to engage with a growing
farm-to-corrections movement.

PA R T 4 | T H E P R I S O N F O O D M AC H I N E

Local food directly
sourced by the
Maine Department of
Corrections

•
•

Potatoes
Kale
Eggs

82

•
••

Mixed Produce
Chard
Multigrain Flour

•
••

Meat
Lettuce
Apples

MDOC procures additional Mainegrown fruit and mixed produce
through larger suppliers, including
Native Maine and Sysco.

•

•
•

Cheese
Milk
Poultry

•

Organic
Mushroom

LaJoie Growers

Farms
•DavisThomas
Egg Farm

W.A. Bean & Sons

·····················································....

• Maine Grains ····················································•

....

• Lakeside Orchards
• Common Wealth Poultry ................................

...

·•

•

•

•
••••
Curtis Custom Meats
•
Spear’s Vegetable Farm
•
Pineland Farms Dairy
Villageside Farm

Oakhurst Dairy

Valley ··················
•• Mousam
Mushrooms

....

Back of house

Instead, they line up
for a pat-down to make
sure they aren’t hiding
food before returning
to their dorms or cells
after another work
shift in prison.

“Right behind you!” An aproned cook dodges a colleague as he
swiftly transfers the first of many large baking pans from prep
table to oven. The steamy heat of the kitchen is punctuated by
a blast of cold air as another worker hurries out of the walk-in
cooler, arms full. The air rings with the clatter of metal spoons
against serving pans as staff prepare for the lunchtime rush.
This could be any busy restaurant kitchen in America, but it’s
not. A closer look reveals knives tethered to the prep tables by
heavy-duty chains. There are no ranges, only ovens and steam
kettles. And those aproned cooks won’t go home after their shift.
Instead, they line up for a pat-down to make sure they aren’t
hiding food before returning to their dorms or cells after another
work shift in prison.

PA R T 4 | T H E P R I S O N F O O D M AC H I N E

83

Average

Hourly wages for
incarcerated people
by state
Tracking wages is not consistent
between states. States most
commonly track on an hourly basis,
but some use daily, weekly, or
even monthly rates. This graphic
shows the possible hourly wages
someone who is incarcerated
could earn on the low or high end
in the states listed.
Source: Sawyer, W. (2017). How
much do incarcerated people
earn in each state? Prison Policy
Initiative. Link here

Wyoming
Wisconsin
Virginia
Vermont
Tennessee
South Dakota
Pennsylvania
New York
New Mexico
Minnesota
Louisiana
Iowa
Indiana
Idaho
Hawaii
Federal
California
Arizona
Alaska
$0.00

$0.50

$1.00

$1.50

$2.00

Visit any prison kitchen in America and almost everyone at
work is a resident of the prison. Although kitchen jobs pay
incarcerated people pennies per hour—if they pay at all—
for intensive labor in a fast-paced and sometimes unsafe
environment, they can be some of the more desirable jobs in
prisons.79 A background in kitchen work can increase a person’s
chances of finding employment after release. Also significant
in an environment where people are hungry much of the time:
kitchen work provides access to extra food, and in many facilities
to raw ingredients and equipment people can use to whip up a
personalized meal on the job.

t

A large kettle is used to cook meat in
Washington state
Source: Impact Justice

This same access can lead to illicit side hustles. Michelle,
who was incarcerated in the Northeast, explains, “A block of
butter goes for ten dollars. People would take fresh chicken
from the officers’ freezer and hide it down their shirt or pants.
… And people will pay!” Or according to James, they’ll trade it
for expensive commissary items. In the Southeastern facilities
where he was incarcerated, James remembers going to the
dining hall in the morning, “not to eat the meal but because the
kitchen guys might be selling something [better], like breakfast
sandwiches. The currency was stamps.” The most exploitative
side hustles siphon away food intended for other incarcerated
people. Michael, who was incarcerated in a West Coast facility,
told us: “When there’s a dish like beef and cabbage, the kitchen
workers will strain the meat out so that the stuff on the tray is

$2.50

PA R T 4 | T H E P R I S O N F O O D M AC H I N E

84

mostly potatoes and cabbage. They put the meat in a bag and
[smuggle] it back [to the dorm] and sell it.”
In some prisons, the only professional on staff is the facility food
services manager, and even the larger prisons might not have
more than a few civilian staff to help with kitchen tasks and to
supervise incarcerated workers. What these professionals bring
to the job varies widely. Some state agencies require all food
service staff to have previous experience and valid credentials
such as a ServSafe Food Handler certificate. Other states don’t
require any related experience or credentials—sometimes
because they simply can’t compete with restaurants, hotels, and
other commercial food service environments in hiring and often
lose staff to these more appealing jobs.

We heard stories from
formerly incarcerated
people about kitchens
that lacked even soap
and hot water; had
roaches crawling out
of the drains and rats
scurrying across the
floor; and routinely
served spoiled food.

As for incarcerated kitchen workers, some have years of
experience cooking in restaurants, while others have never
even cooked much for themselves. Those with low literacy or
for whom English is their second language may struggle to
read a recipe or communicate with the rest of the kitchen team.
Complicating the situation, in some prisons, incarcerated people
are required to rotate jobs or may have to switch jobs or change
their shift schedule on short notice to accommodate educational
and therapeutic programming, which is the top priority. The
bottom line according to corrections leaders around the country:
keeping prison kitchens staffed with skilled workers is a
challenge that affects food quality and safety.
We visited one East Coast facility with spotless countertops
that could have easily passed military inspection. That kitchen
also has a state-of-the-art touchscreen oven. At the other
extreme, we heard stories from formerly incarcerated people
about kitchens that lacked even soap and hot water; had roaches
crawling out of the drains and rats scurrying across the floor;
and routinely served spoiled food. As one person reported to the
Incarcerated Workers Organizing Committee, “Our containers
we have our juice made and served in are often moldy. We do not
have proper chemicals, like bleach, to clean them out. Our trays
and cups are often dirty also. There are rats and roaches in the
kitchen too.”80

PA R T 4 | T H E P R I S O N F O O D M AC H I N E

85

Marcus, who worked in restaurants before he was incarcerated
in a West Coast prison, took the lead in establishing safer food
handling practices, explaining, “Prior to me becoming lead cook
… They didn’t heat and cool [food] at the proper temperatures,
which could cause E. coli.” Also, when incarcerated people with
bacterial and viral infections are required to report to work
and handle food and serving vessels without taking additional
precautions, they can spread disease throughout a facility.

Walk-in coolers, large
pantries, and other
secluded spaces in
poorly supervised
kitchens are
unfortunately ideal
sites for predatory
acts by staff or other
incarcerated people.

Lax kitchen oversight can result in dangers beyond food
safety. Walk-in coolers, large pantries, and other secluded
spaces in poorly supervised kitchens are unfortunately ideal
sites for predatory acts by staff or other incarcerated people.
A 2009 report from the Bureau of Justice Statistics found that
of incarcerated people who were sexually victimized by staff,
about a third of reported incidents took place in the kitchen or
workshop.81 In cases where the assailant was another resident,
20% of those assaults occurred in the prison kitchen. James,
who “got tired” of working in the kitchen, told us, “If they want
to attack somebody, they don’t do it on the yard, they do it in
the kitchen.” And the facility’s response can be dangerous to
bystanders. Once when a kitchen worker was stabbed on the job,
according to James, the security staff responded with tear gas.

What about the money?
In 2016, the California Department of Corrections and
Rehabilitation spent just $3.14 a day to provide breakfast, lunch,
and dinner for each person confined in a state prison—roughly
one dollar per meal.82 That same year, the City of San Diego,
which runs the state’s second-largest school district, spent
$2.25 per child for lunch alone.83 And the California Department
of Veterans Affairs allocated about $8.25 per day to feed the
residents of its long-term care facilities.84
Good food isn’t cheap, especially when provided on a massive
scale. Many corrections leaders report that their agencies

PA R T 4 | T H E P R I S O N F O O D M AC H I N E

Historical daily
amount spent on
prison food per person

Source: Impact Justice(2020).
Stephan, J. J. (2004). State Prison
Expenditures, 2001. Washington,
DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Link here

1996

2001

2018

Pennsylvania, $8.96

COST (USD)

This graphic shows the historic
daily amounts spent on prison food
(prices adjusted for inflation.) Each
line represents one of the 33 states
that had available data.

86

State Prison Expenditures, 1996.
Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice
Statistics. Link here

“The cost of food goes
up, and it’s a challenge
for elected officials who
approve our budgets to
recognize how inflation
directly impacts food,”
explained the head of
one state’s department
of corrections.

Florida, $5.65

Wyoming, $4.30

Oklahoma, $2.62
Pennsylvania, $2.61
Oklahoma, $1.89

Florida, $2.02
Wyoming, $1.47

simply don’t have the money to improve the quality of meals,
especially given rising food prices. What seems like a minor
change, such as adding two more ounces of protein at dinner
or a banana at breakfast, adds up quickly. When the governor
of Washington issued an executive order in 2013 to improve
access to healthy foods in all state agencies and facilities, the
department of corrections struggled to get additional funds
from the legislature to implement the required changes. “To add
one fresh fruit per day to the entire population for a year is $1.1
million,” a Washington Department of Corrections food services
administrator explained.
“The cost of food goes up, and it’s a challenge for elected
officials who approve our budgets to recognize how inflation
directly impacts food,” explained the head of one state’s
department of corrections. Another agency’s operations
manager added, “Our food budget has been status quo for eight
years. Prices go up but that’s all we have.” For some lawmakers,
the resistance is deeper than that. “No one wants to give us tax
dollars because we house incarcerated people,” one agency’s
outreach director told us. Many states have turned to “pay to
stay” policies that allow departments of correction to charge

PA R T 4 | T H E P R I S O N F O O D M AC H I N E

87

incarcerated people fees for their room and board. Unlike fines
and restitution, whose purpose is to punish or compensate
victims, fees are intended to raise revenue.85

Food cost: per day
breakdown (2018)
States report the amount spent on
food per incarcerated person per day,
but there is no standardized measure
for what is included in that cost.
This table shows the costs reported
and what costs other than food
ingredients are factored in.
Source: Impact Justice (2020).

These corrections leaders aren’t wrong in describing the
challenges around food budgets, and yet the money spent on
food services is typically just a tiny sliver of the department’s
total budget. For example, the $1.1 million required for extra fruit
in the example above is only .04% of the Washington Department
of Corrections budget.86 Logically, shifting the budget to invest
more in healthier food would likely decrease reliance on medical
services (which are often severely underfunded to the point
of gross negligence).87 Although formal research hasn’t been
done specifically in prisons, there is plenty of evidence that

STATE

FOOD COST

STATE

FOOD COST

Alabama

$1.90

Nebraska

$2.92

Arizona

$3.81

New Hampshire

$2.84

California

$2.45

New York

$2.84

Colorado

$3.43

North Carolina

$2.82

Delaware

$3.08

Oklahoma

$2.62

Florida

$2.02

Pennsylvania

$2.61

Idaho

$2.75

Rhode Island

$3.93

Illinois

$2.21

Tennessee

$4.42

Indiana

$3.83

Texas

$2.49

Kansas

$1.53

Utah

$3.79

Kentucky

$3.28

Virginia

$2.10

Maine

$4.05

Washington

$4.50

Maryland

$4.18

West Virginia

$1.55

Massachusetts

$4.06

Wisconsin

$1.02

Minnesota

$3.45

Wyoming

$1.47

Mississippi

$3.00

•

STAFF
(Incarcerated)

••
••••
•• •• •• •
•
••
••
•

STAFF
(Non-incarcerated)

•

UTENSILS

•

PACKAGING

•

•
••
•• •
•• • • •
••
EQUIPMENT +
OTHER COSTS

PA R T 4 | T H E P R I S O N F O O D M AC H I N E

Food budget as a
proportion of DOC
spending

4%

Food services

43%
$2,712,414,940
Total budget

Correctional
security
operations

21%
Medical & mental
health care

Source: Texas Department of Criminal
Justice. (2018). Fiscal Year 2019
Operating Budget. Link here

88

consuming a healthy diet rich in fresh fruits, vegetables, and
other whole foods could yield billions of dollars in savings
nationwide each year on treatment for heart disease, diabetes,
cancer, hip fractures, and Alzheimer’s disease.88 A new approach
to diabetes treatment and prevention called the Fresh Food
Pharmacy predicts that spending about $1,000 over one year on
healthy food for one low-income diabetes patient will result in
$24,000 in health care cost savings over that same period.89
Observational evidence suggests that improving food in
correctional facilities can have a similar impact. Before taking
up her current post as Director of the Ohio Department of
Corrections and Rehabilitation, Annette Chambers-Smith served
as the Chief of the Bureau of Medical Services, where she
oversaw the budget as the department modified their mainline
meals to meet new “heart-healthy” standards. “I saw the
spending for certain blood pressure medications and diabetes
medications decrease,” she told us.
As we noted in Part 2, when bellies are full and micronutrient
requirements are met, people are less likely to behave in ways
that are aggressive, violent, or otherwise anti-social. Complaints
about food are frequently cited during prison strikes and riots,
events that are very costly from a security perspective. Food that
tastes good and promotes health is less likely to end up dumped
in the garbage can, potentially saving money on waste removal.
In 2019, Mountain View Correctional Facility in Maine saved over
$125,000 in waste hauling fees by improving food quality and
composting food scraps.

PROCUREMENT

•

It is possible to purchase higher-quality ingredients and prepare
better meals without spending more money—sometimes even
saving it. By negotiating with a local dairy to purchase oddlyshaped cheese for just $2 per pound, the Maine Department
of Corrections not only procured a better product but also
saved money (it previously paid $2.29 per pound to a national
supplier). The DOC also purchases locally-milled flour,
mushrooms, and other ingredients from Maine producers at

PA R T 4 | T H E P R I S O N F O O D M AC H I N E

MENU PL ANNING &
ME AL PREPAR ATION

•

Maine’s Mountain
View Correctional
Facility, for instance,
bakes all of its bread
(including wholegrain loaves, rolls, and
buns) in-house, saving
$80-100 each day just

89

equal or lower cost than from a national supplier. While some
facilities around the country choose to pay more for convenience
(spending extra dollars on instant mashed potatoes or on liquid
egg product rather than whole eggs, for example), preparing
food from scratch can result in both tastier meals and significant
cost savings. Maine’s Mountain View Correctional Facility, for
instance, bakes all of its bread (including whole-grain loaves,
rolls, and buns) in-house, saving $80-100 each day just on
bread products.
Government officials acknowledge the challenge of trying to
direct money toward improving prison food. “It’s so unfortunate
that the public perception of quality of life is like, ‘Why are you
improving things for adults in custody?’” a public health expert
in one state’s government told us. “Framing it as saving money is
the only way to get people to hear you.”

on bread products.
Outsourcing food service
While only about 9% of incarcerated people in the U.S. are
housed in private prisons, many more are served meals planned,
sourced, and provided by private companies such as Aramark,
Trinity, and Sodexo.90 Of the 35 state correctional agencies we
surveyed, one in three currently uses privatized food service
(not all states privatize for every facility). These companies
often employ their own dietitians to assist with menu planning,
and the on-site food service manager and any other civilian staff
working in the prison kitchen are also likely to be employees of
the company.
With other institutional clients ranging from public school
districts and college campuses to hospitals and corporate
cafeterias, these companies wield immense purchasing power
and can negotiate rock-bottom prices from food suppliers
around the country—savings they pass along, at least in part,
to the state departments of correction that hire them, often
specifically to cut costs.

PA R T 4 | T H E P R I S O N F O O D M AC H I N E

90

States with privatized
food service
From our survey and policy research,
we found that at least 15 states rely
on some amount of privatization for
their food service. This ranges from
statewide privatization to one or two
facilities. This map shows which states
use privatized food service in at least
one facility. This map does not include
instances where the entire facility is
operated by a private entity.

•
•
•
•

Aramark
Trinity
GEO Group

•
•
•

•

• ••

Sodexo
Keagan’s Food Service
Morrison

No privatization
Privatization
No Data

Source: Impact Justice(2020).

Although the privatization listed here refers to food served in prison
kitchens, it should be noted that there is a great deal of commissary
privatization. Only four states that completed our survey stated that they
do not contract with a private commissary vendor, whereas 16 states
contract with Trinity or Keefe Group (which are both subsidiaries of the
same company: TKC Holdings, Inc.) and four states contract with Trinity
for both commissary and kitchen service.

Some corrections officials believe these large companies end up
providing better quality than state-run meal services because
they are subject to many more inspections as part of their
contract monitoring. We spoke with a warden at a Midwestern
prison who told us the state department of corrections actively
oversees their food services provider, levying financial penalties
if the company strays from the department’s nutritional and
other food service standards.
Rigorously comparing food services provided by private
companies with those of state correctional agencies was beyond
the scope of our research, but several people we surveyed
or interviewed were far less sanguine than the Midwestern
prison warden. Current and formerly incarcerated people who
have spent time in multiple facilities report that food from
private providers is significantly less palatable, nutritious,
and plentiful—and sometimes even worse if the kitchen and
commissary are run by subsidiaries of the same company. Many
people who have encountered this situation believe meals are
intentionally unappetizing so that people will purchase more

PA R T 4 | T H E P R I S O N F O O D M AC H I N E

“When you go to a
privatized model,
dignity for inmates
takes a backseat,”
one food services
director told us.

91

from the commissary. Corrections leadership and frontline staff
in some states expressed similar concerns that prioritizing a
company’s bottom line results in lower-quality food and the use
of underpaid and under-supervised workers. “When you go to a
privatized model, dignity for inmates takes a backseat,” one food
services director told us.
Michigan is now notorious in this regard. The state correctional
agency hired Aramark in 2013 to handle food service in all
prisons, motivated by the projected $16 million in annual savings
(mostly achieved by replacing unionized state employees with
contract workers).91 Officials could not have imagined the
disastrous problems that would ensue. Kitchens regularly ran
out of ingredients, and meals were routinely served late and
lacked the required calories—and these were the least egregious
failures. Kitchen staff employed by Aramark were knowingly
serving rotten food and even fishing food out of trash cans
for the next round of trays. There were maggot infestations
and outbreaks of foodborne illness. Staff showed up to work
intoxicated, smuggled drugs into prisons, and assaulted some
residents and had sexual relations with others.92
Perhaps the most cautionary aspect of this tale is that many of
the problems recurred after the agency fired Aramark in 2015
and switched to Trinity. Less than a year later—but after years of
awful and unsafe food—incarcerated men and women in facilities
throughout the state protested, and at one facility, rioted. In
2018, the governor directed the agency to resume food service
operations in-house despite the $13.7 million increase in the
budget for prison food that year.
One correctional dietitian pointed out that there are a number of
factors that can influence the quality of food on any given day,
ranging from supply chain interruptions to staff shortages and
facility lockdowns. Our investigation suggests, however, that
the appalling food and other substandard conditions described
in this report are not anomalies; in many facilities, it is a daily

PA R T 4 | T H E P R I S O N F O O D M AC H I N E

92

experience. This is particularly grievous in an environment
where people don’t have any alternative source of food. Unlike a
restaurant that gets shut down if it fails its department of health
inspection, a prison kitchen can continue to operate with flagrant
health violations and only a promise to do better.
NEXT UP
PART 5: WHO’S LOOKING? WHO’S LISTENING?

In Part 5 of Eating Behind Bars, we’ll examine the systems that
should—but too often don’t—function to hold departments of
correction accountable for the quality of food in prison.

I
I
I
I
I
I
I

(

INTRO

kl:fJ

LJ

- " ··

~

PART 1

-

/

PART 2

./

PART 3

I

PART 4
PART 5
PART 6

I

PART 5

Who’s Looking?
Who’s Listening?
“One day every three months it would be good; [the trays]
would be full because they had a kitchen inspection.”
— formerly incarcerated person

This section examines the meager systems of accountability that have often
failed to ensure food safety and quality, allowing the violations of health and
dignity we’ve detailed in the earlier installments of Eating Behind Bars.
In the world beyond the prison gate, commercial and other large-scale kitchens are subject
to rigorous health inspections. Inspectors show up without advance notice, are not shy to
document violations, and can force kitchens to close until the problems are remedied. In
this way, health departments protect the dining public. Kitchens in prisons are not subject
to anywhere near the same degree of independent external oversight.

--~---

PA R T 5 | W H O ’ S LO O K I N G ? W H O ’ S L I S T E N I N G ?

94

A quick clean-up
Prisons that are subject to health department inspections—and
in some states they aren’t—typically know ahead of time when
an inspection will take place. The same is true of an audit by the
American Correctional Association and internal reviews by the
correctional agency itself. As Theo told us, “When they do come
in, the kitchen is spotless, the correct portion sizes are served.
One day every three months it would be good, [the trays] would
be full because they had a kitchen inspection.” Our surveys and
interviews suggest that a quick clean-up to present a sanitary
kitchen and safe food handling is routine in both public and
private correctional facilities.

Internal monitoring
may also be lax, but
it’s impossible to
know because there’s
little transparency in
this regard.

In our survey of state correctional agencies, we requested
examples of health inspections. The 20 copies we received were
uniformly favorable reviews incompatible with the food safety
issues revealed in our own investigation. In South Carolina, for
example, the Department of Health and Environmental Control
inspects prison kitchens. In 2016, Turbeville Correctional Center
received a score of 93%—yet a video recorded in the same year
showed maggots crawling in the facility’s cornmeal.93
While about 80% of all state correctional facilities are accredited
by the American Correctional Association, which requires
meeting certain food service standards, those standards are
vague. Maintaining accreditation requires an audit just once every
three years, always with advance notice. Our investigation did not
indicate that ACA accreditation adequately addresses any of the
many problems with food quality and safety that this report raises.
Internal monitoring may also be lax, but it’s impossible to know
because there is little transparency in this regard. Like restaurants,
facilities are required to make a range of daily or weekly checks
regarding food freshness, food temperature, sanitation and
hygiene, etc. Many state agencies require facilities to log and
report these numbers, but rarely share data with the public.

PA R T 5 | W H O ’ S LO O K I N G ? W H O ’ S L I S T E N I N G ?

Examples of ACA
standards94
These are three of the 16
ACA standards that pertain
to food service in adult
correctional facilities.

4-4313
Food service
operations are
supervised by a fulltime staff member
who is experienced
in food service
management.

95

4-4317
Written policy, procedure, and practice
require that food service staff plan menus in
advance and substantially follow the plan and
that the planning and preparing of all meals
take into consideration food flavor, texture,
temperature, appearance, and palatability.

4-4326
Written policy, procedure, and practice provide
that meals are served under conditions that
minimize regimentation, although there should
be direct supervision by staff members.

“Some facilities I go
into once a year; some
it’s in the contract but
they tell me not to
come because of the
budget [or] because
there are no problems.”
— corrections dietitian

The monitoring and inspections that do occur focus narrowly on
sanitation, safety, and equipment—not the nutritional quality of
the food and certainly not the degree to which the food served is
appetizing. While most state correctional agencies—nearly twothirds of the 35 that responded to our survey—report that they
require a nutrition professional to review planned menus, there
was far less consistency in using those professionals to monitor
the nutritional quality of the meals that are actually served. As
one corrections dietitian explained, “Some facilities I go into
once a year; some it’s in the contract but they tell me not to come
because of the budget [or] because there are no problems.”
Another dietitian points out that because the nutritional quality
of food deteriorates over time, meal components that have been
sitting in storage for months or even years don’t necessarily offer
the same nutrient profile as the approved menus do. Quality
control in many prisons comes down to a conscientious food
service manager or a concerned warden.

PA R T 5 | W H O ’ S LO O K I N G ? W H O ’ S L I S T E N I N G ?

The gap between
policy and practice
This graphic contrasts
the language that is
commonly used in official
DOC policy with the
observations of people who
have been incarcerated,
to demonstrate the
considerable gap between
what is stated in policy and
what happens in practice.

96

Meals that are nutritious and appealing
POLICY

PRACTICE

• “provides or makes available
nutritious, visually appealing and
cost effective meals”
- Arizona DOC

• “In most institutions, the food was
barely edible.”

• “to provide all inmates with
nutritionally adequate meals that
are of appropriate quantity and
quality” - Massachusetts DOC

• “Inadequate, gross, unappetizing.”

• “nutritionally balanced and
served in an appetizing manner”
- New Mexico DOC

• “It doesn’t have to be exotic, just
edible and nutritious.”

• “Always hungry.”

• “No one deserves undercooked
food.”

Meeting safety and sanitation requirements
POLICY

PRACTICE

• “We adhere to the highest
standards of food safety and
institutional security.”
- Idaho DOC

• “Spoiled. Roaches in the kitchen.”

• “prepared and served in a
manner that meets established
governmental health and safety
codes.” - Colorado DOC

• “Never the right temperature.”
• “The only time that the kitchen
would be cleaned is when there
was an inspection by the health
department.”

• “prepared under sanitary
conditions and served in an
appetizing manner.”
- Alabama DOC

Supporting human dignity and rehabilitation
POLICY

PRACTICE

• “We know that you rely on us to
make wise decisions in preparing
a menu that will help you on your
path toward reentering society.”
- Montana State Prison

• “They don’t care about us as
people.”

• “to promote the physical and
mental well-being of offenders in
Department facilities”
- Indiana DOC

• “The food they serve in jails and
prisons should be considered
cruel and unusual punishment.”

• “Labels that state ‘not fit for
human consumption.’”

PA R T 5 | W H O ’ S LO O K I N G ? W H O ’ S L I S T E N I N G ?

97

“Feedback? Oh no! You ate it or you didn’t.”

OVERSIGHT & FEEDBACK

•

70%

of survey respondents said
they never had a choice in
what they were served

What about the incarcerated people who rely on this food? Do
their views matter? Only 12 states in our survey reported having
any kind of policy (and only two with written policies) about
incorporating incarcerated people’s input in the menus. Those
policies ranged from “word of mouth” to testing recipes in small
batches and soliciting feedback from incarcerated people before
integrating them into menus statewide. A few outlier agencies,
including the Washington Department of Corrections, engage
incarcerated people in menu development, routinely survey
residents of all facilities about the appeal of the food served, and
reportedly remove items with low ratings from the menu.
In most prisons, however, the only avenue to express discontent
or make constructive suggestions is the grievance process,
which our exploration suggests can be frustrating and futile.
“Feedback? Oh no! You ate it or you didn’t,” Kayla told us,
reflecting on her years in a Southern prison. “You could put in
a grievance but it was basically a waste of paper.” The fact that
some staff cling to the belief that incarcerated people will lie to
get what they want undermines the grievance process.

“Feedback? Oh no!
You ate it or you
didn’t. You could put
in a grievance but it
was basically a waste
of paper.”
— Kayla, incarcerated 2.5 years

Michelle described the gamble some people take in filing a
grievance: If the complaint is relayed to food service staff
you might end up with even worse food on your tray, or if
you encourage others to complain, you might be “written
up for ‘inciting a riot’ and sent to the hole.” Indeed, when
one enterprising incarcerated person compared every meal
served over the course of a month with the state’s master
menu and dietary requirements, revealing the considerable
discrepancies, he was sent to solitary confinement for a month,
then transferred to a facility a hundred miles away without
explanation. His account has since been published by the
Marshall Project.95

PA R T 5 | W H O ’ S LO O K I N G ? W H O ’ S L I S T E N I N G ?

10%

of survey respondents
agreed that when they
gave an opinion about
a meal, it was taken
seriously by the cooks or
food manager

98

As many experts have observed, the prison grievance process
is designed to protect the facility and the state, and rarely
functions as a tool to aid incarcerated people—which is why the
process is arduous and confusing.96 In many states, for example,
incarcerated people must first document attempts at informal
resolution, such as talking to an officer in the dining hall. But that
can be awkward or intimidating, and there’s never a way to prove
the conversation even took place. Between extensive paperwork,
arbitrary rules, and complex submission procedures, filing a
complaint is difficult and time-consuming, and may not spark a
meaningful response.97 Low volume of grievances, therefore,
can’t necessarily be equated with good food.
For members of the public seeking to hold prisons accountable,
information about grievances is not easy to get. When University
of Michigan law students at the school’s Prison Information
Project sought to obtain nationwide grievance policies and
information about actual grievances filed through the Freedom
of Information Act process, they faced difficult-to-find contact
information, lengthy delays in response time, and exorbitant
fees. Much of the information they were able to collect consisted
of vague statistics, such as numbers of grievances by category
(e.g., medical, property, food services, etc.) and proportion
denied. Very few states provided details about the nature of the
complaints. Arizona’s list of Food Grievance Appeals is a notable
exception, providing insight into the types of grievances lodged,
such as “mice droppings in food,” “time between insulin injection
and meals,” “food menu inhumane,” and a plethora regarding
“food portions.”98

PA R T 5 | W H O ’ S LO O K I N G ? W H O ’ S L I S T E N I N G ?

A COMMITMENT
TO OVERSIGHT

•

OVERSIGHT & FEEDBACK

99

In Washington State, the Office of the Corrections Ombuds
(OCO) investigates and monitors complaints related to the
health, safety, welfare, and rights of people incarcerated in the
state. In 2019, the office reported on a food survey conducted
at the Washington State Penitentiary in the wake of food strikes
in 2018 and 2019. The survey results uncovered dissatisfaction
with quantity (“We are grown men, we should be fed
accordingly”), quality (“the worst mess I’ve ever tasted, smelled,
and seen”), and recognition of human dignity (“They will give us
hog slop just to save a nickel”). Respondents expressed concern
about the decline in food quality since the centralization of food
preparation by Correctional Industries. The survey also provided
an opportunity for suggestions, such as increasing portion
size, serving sauces and gravies on the side, and allowing
some choice in meals (such as offering both a hot entree and a
sandwich alternative). The report provides a level of detail and
candor typically unavailable to those outside the department of
corrections, and offers advocates and policymakers a degree of
transparency into the prison food experience—an important step
toward positive change.
Since the release of the report, the department of corrections
has worked with the OCO to implement changes across the
state (including switching out unpopular menu items and
repairing broken equipment that contributed to burnt food), and
continued to meet regularly with OCO staff to work on further
solutions. The DOC is also working with a dietitian at the state’s
department of health to assist with the development of a quality
assurance assessment and serve as a third-party reviewer of
prison meals.
Across the country, the Correctional Association of New York
(CANY) is an independent organization with the authority under
state law to monitor prisons. Founded in 1844, CANY provides
independent oversight of the 52 prisons in New York in order to
promote transparency and accountability, safeguard the human
and civil rights of incarcerated people, eliminate harmful practices
and policies, and decrease the use of incarceration in New York.

PA R T 5 | W H O ’ S LO O K I N G ? W H O ’ S L I S T E N I N G ?

100

CANY is beginning to explore the issue of food in New York’s prisons. Executive Director
Jennifer Scaife explains that people incarcerated in the state’s facilities frequently bring
up food as an area of grave concern, so the organization has distributed a survey to
understand the problem further. With CANY able to scrutinize policies and practices and
share its discoveries with lawmakers and the general public, the organization is poised to
advocate for improvements to prison food in New York.

Cruel and unusual—a high bar to meet
Given the futility and lack of trust in the internal grievance
process, in most states the courts are the only oversight and
avenue to change—and the legal hurdles are high. Generally
litigants have to prove that the poor quality of the food
constitutes cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the
Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, or breaks some
other state or federal law.

The judge added that to
meet the legal standard
of “cruel and unusual,”
facility staff would
have had to serve the
offending food with
deliberate indifference.

Unfortunately, “cruel and unusual” isn’t clearly defined and is
therefore subject to the opinion of the judge hearing any given
case. In 2019, a federal judge threw out a class action lawsuit
by a group of currently and formerly incarcerated people in
Oregon who argued that they were served food that was spoiled
and labeled unfit for human consumption at four of the state’s
correctional facilities. The judge dismissed the case, writing in
his decision that the Eighth Amendment only requires that food
be adequate to maintain health and that plaintiffs “produced
no medical records corroborating any decline in health, or any
evidence that they suffered from a serious medical condition
as a result of the food.” The judge added that to meet the legal
standard of “cruel and unusual,” facility staff would have had to
serve the offending food with deliberate indifference.99
Some lawsuits challenge the constitutionality of the daily
diet. In a current case against the New Jersey Department of
Corrections, Raymond Skelton, who has been incarcerated for

PA R T 5 | W H O ’ S LO O K I N G ? W H O ’ S L I S T E N I N G ?

“[The department
is] literally killing
inmates from the
inside out.”
— Raymond Skelton, who is suing
the New Jersey DOC

101

nearly a decade, contends that the food in the state’s prisons is
medically inadvisable for more than 12,000 incarcerated people
like him who suffer chronic diseases including diabetes and
high blood pressure. His attorney contends that the department
is depriving people of the fruits and vegetables that provide
necessary nutrients for health, “literally killing inmates from
the inside out.”100 Such cases are difficult to win, however. In a
similar lawsuit against the Virginia Department of Corrections
in 2018, the judge dismissed the case on the grounds that the
food provided did not “present any health risk of constitutional
significance under the Eighth Amendment.”101
Other lawsuits focus on breaches of sanitation and hygiene
in the eating environment. In 2019, incarcerated people at
the California Substance Abuse Treatment and State Prison
at Corcoran filed a case against the state over conditions at
a facility dining hall where a seriously damaged roof meant
that mice, bird droppings, dead bird parts, and maggots were
actually falling onto tables and trays while people were eating.
In that case, the judge ruled that the unsanitary conditions
created a serious hazard to health and ordered staff to provide
an alternative dining area until repairs could be made.102
Even departments of correction occasionally seek legal
remedies in food-related cases. The Washington Department
of Corrections is currently suing the federal government over
decades of chemical runoff from an Air Force base that has
contaminated facility water sources and tainted food produced at
the Airway Heights Corrections Center, one of two food factories
that supplies meal items to prisons across the state.103

Food as punishment
Perhaps the most salient example of oversight not functioning
as it should is the widespread use of food as a disciplinary tool.
We spoke with a number of leaders and frontline staff in the
corrections profession who assured us that food is not and
should never be used as a form of punishment. The American

PA R T 5 | W H O ’ S LO O K I N G ? W H O ’ S L I S T E N I N G ?

N UTR A LOA F R ECI PE

Nutraloaf recipe
Based on the Delaware
Department of Correction recipe

INGREDIENTS
• Pineapple chunks
• Tomato puree

18 14
STATES STILL
SERVE NUTRALOAF

• Chopped spinach
• Sliced potatoes

• Cheese sauce mix

102

STATES DON’T
SERVE NUTRALOAF

• Nonfat dry milk
• Oatmeal

Delaware, Florida, Indiana, Iowa,
Kansas, Michigan, Montana,
Nevada, New Mexico, North
Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, South
Carolina, Texas, Vermont, Virginia,
Washington, Wisconsin.

• Rice

• Carrots

• Wheat bread
• Salad oil

Arkansas, California, Georgia,
Idaho, Maryland, Massachusetts,
Minnesota, Nebraska, New York,
Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South
Dakota, West Virginia, Wyoming.

COOKING INSTRUCTIONS
Thoroughly mix all ingredients and
place in bread pans.
Bake at 350 degrees until done.

“The food there
was designed to
slowly break your
body and mind.”
— formerly incarcerated
survey respondent

We do not have reliable data on the use of nutraloaf in the following states:
Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Kentucky,
Louisiana, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North
Dakota, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Utah.

Correctional Association, to which over 900 facilities look for
guidance, urges state correctional agencies and individual
prisons to provide a written policy “precluding the use of food
as a disciplinary measure.”104 Yet, the stories of food being used
as punishment and discipline that formerly incarcerated people
shared with us suggest that the age-old practice of punishing
people by withholding food or serving disgusting food persists
in many prisons, both in practice and in some cases enshrined
in policy as well. As one person we surveyed wrote, “The food
there was designed to slowly break your body and mind.”
The food service policies in at least 36 states require or allow
the use of an alternative meal as a disciplinary measure. Many
states are vague in their descriptions of these alternatives,
mentioning, for example, that “bagged meals” or “finger foods”
are to be served in lieu of the standard tray. At least 18 states

PA R T 5 | W H O ’ S LO O K I N G ? W H O ’ S L I S T E N I N G ?

103

still explicitly allow the use of nutraloaf—a purposely tasteless
mash of ingredients such as bread, potato, cabbage, ground
meat, beans, powdered milk, and oil baked into a dense loaf.
Nutraloaf can be served for each meal of the day for up to a
week at the discretion of staff.105 While a serving of nutraloaf may
technically meet the daily nutrient requirements, for many people
it’s simply too disgusting to eat, or if they do eat it, they are still
hungry afterwards.

t

A disciplinary loaf is prepared at
Ferguson Unit in Texas in 1997
Source: Getty Images

“If you got sent to the
hole, they would only
feed you two meals a day.
At 5 a.m. you’d get the
first tray, and at 11 a.m.
the second tray with the
loaf. Then you had about
18 hours before you
got to eat again. People
were eating toothpaste
and toilet paper just to
have something in their
stomach.”
— Rosa, incarcerated 33 years

Many of the people receiving these alternative meals are in
solitary confinement, where at least 61,000 people are housed
on any given day.106 Thirty-six percent of our survey respondents
who spent time in solitary confinement say they were served
nutraloaf. Even if it’s not “the loaf,” the food is “horrible,” as
Marcus recalled of his time in a West Coast prison. “You get eggs
that are not even real eggs, and they’re all watery and not really
cooked, and maybe three tablespoons of oatmeal. And they do
that on purpose, like a continued punishment.” According to
Marcus, this is the case whether people are in administrative or
disciplinary segregation or in a secure housing unit (SHU) for
their own protection.
Michelle, who was incarcerated in the Northeast, also describes
the way mealtime is perverted in solitary confinement. “We
would have to wait for officers to finish their own food, their
breaks, their card games, and then when they decide they want
to, we would get fed. You almost always got cold food ... No
toast, just a hard piece of bread. Also, the trays for solitary need
a lid that shuts to fit through the slot, so they don’t fit the proper
portion size.”
Rosa shook her head as she painfully recalled eating in solitary
confinement in a Southern facility: “If you got sent to the hole,
they would only feed you two meals a day. At 5 a.m. you’d get
the first tray, and at 11 a.m. the second tray with the loaf. Then
you had about 18 hours before you got to eat again. People were

PA R T 5 | W H O ’ S LO O K I N G ? W H O ’ S L I S T E N I N G ?

61%

of survey respondents
reported they received
less food while in a solitary
housing unit than they did in
the general population

104

eating toothpaste and toilet paper just to have something in
their stomach.”
More than half (61%) of the people we surveyed reported that
they received less food while in a solitary housing unit than they
did in the general population. Those in solitary confinement are
generally unable to supplement this meager fare; commissary
access tends to be significantly limited or prohibited altogether.
Our inquiry suggests that the eating experience for people in
designated mental health units can be even worse. One woman
who spent time in the mental health unit of an East Coast prison
was shocked at the lack of basic sanitation: “Women who were
menstruating had to hold pads to their bodies with their hands
since no underwear was allowed, while they had to eat with their
hands because no flatware was allowed.”
Food-related disciplinary measures are not limited to people
in special housing. Several people told us that getting caught
sharing or trading food in the chow hall would result in both
parties having to throw away their trays mid-meal, while other
officers might be giving out disciplinary tickets to people for
“wasting food,” because they couldn’t or didn’t want to eat all the
food on their tray. We were told that a housing unit deemed to be
disruptive might be fed last, after the food was cold.
Possessing “contraband food”—something as benign as carrying
a piece of fruit or bread out of the chow hall to eat as a snack
later on—can result in consequences such as extra work detail,
losing one’s job, or even getting sent to solitary confinement,
we were told. We documented accounts of officers smashing
and ruining an individual’s stash of food from the commissary
as punishment for trading snacks on the yard. In one Alabama
prison, the warden threatened to withhold food from men whose
hairstyles were not in compliance with facility regulations.107

PA R T 5 | W H O ’ S LO O K I N G ? W H O ’ S L I S T E N I N G ?

105

Food as a mechanism of control
Precisely because food is integral to our identities, it has been
deliberately used to dehumanize, humiliate, punish, and control
groups of people throughout human history. In Spain during the
Inquisition, Nazi Germany, and other anti-Semitic purges, Jewish
people were coerced into eating pork, often considered the most
offensive of non-kosher foods. Native American tribes, removed
from their own land, were severed from their traditional food
sources and forced to subsist on government commodities like
white flour and lard. Progressive Era reformers in the early 20th
century campaigned against the “ethnic” food of immigrants
as dangerous to the health and modernization of the American
nation. More recently, as thousands of unaccompanied Central
American children crossed the southern United States border
in 2014 to escape violence in their home countries, many
Americans resented tax dollars being used to buy them corn
tortillas when the Federal Emergency Management Agency had
already purchased flour tortillas. Xenophobia turned a culturally
appropriate food staple for already traumatized children into a
“luxury” item.

A number of corrections
leaders told us that for many
years the prevailing attitude
among staff was “Fill them
up so they go to sleep” by
providing plenty of sugary
and fat-heavy calories to
encourage lethargic and
docile behavior.

The appalling instances of food used deliberately as a
disciplinary measure in prison are just the tip of the iceberg
when it comes to shaming and controlling incarcerated people
through food. A number of corrections leaders told us that for
many years the prevailing attitude among staff was “Fill them
up so they go to sleep” by providing plenty of sugary and fatheavy calories to encourage lethargic and docile behavior. From
references to “feeding times” to the routine appearance of items
that arrive marked “Not for human consumption,” food in prison
serves as a language that speaks to and about incarcerated
people: You are not worthy. You are less than human.
These stigmatizing messages ring in the ears of the
incarcerated and seep into the larger culture: the grimy tray with
unidentifiable slop is not just a caricature in the media, but also
a widely recognized symbol of life in prison. When faced with a

PA R T 5 | W H O ’ S LO O K I N G ? W H O ’ S L I S T E N I N G ?

Any meaningful
improvement
in prison food
requires listening to

106

particularly unappetizing meal in a school cafeteria, both kids
and adults are likely to compare it to prison food. As a nation,
we’ve come to accept a demeaning correctional food experience
as normal, which only further distances us from the actual
human beings in prison.

incarcerated people
and restoring their
agency regarding
what they eat.

In response to the dehumanization of the prison experience,
incarcerated people have long relied on hunger strikes and meal
strikes as a symbol of resistance and a tool in the struggle to
be treated with respect. Any meaningful improvement in prison
food requires listening to incarcerated people and restoring their
agency regarding what they eat.
NEXT UP
PART 6: A PATH FORWARD

In the next and final installment, we offer a framework of
key insights to encourage and guide change toward a more
positive and nourishing eating experience in prison. We share
the many benefits of making food a source of healing, health,
and dignity in prison.

I
I
I
I
I
I
I

INTRO
PART 1
PART 2
PART 3
PART 4
PART 5
PART 6

PART 6

A Path Forward
“Food is a universal comfort and basic necessity.”
— loved one of someone who is incarcerated

You walk into the prison chow hall and the smell hits you first: peaches and cinnamon.
You make your way across the sunlit room toward the serving line, chatting with
someone as you wait. When it’s your turn, you survey the offerings and request the
brown rice, sautéed vegetables, a piece of roasted chicken, and a large portion of
fresh green salad. You thank the servers and reach for a small dish of peach crisp to
round out your meal. Before joining a friend at a nearby table, you fill your cup with
cold filtered water from the dispenser.
An officer asks if the seat across from your friend is taken; you say no and he pulls out
the chair and sets down his tray. Over the next half hour, you each get up for second
helpings and the conversation shifts from sports to the meal: Is the eggplant from the
kitchen garden? Is that fresh basil in the vinaigrette? The meal is just what you need
after your morning work shift and before class begins. After clearing your plate, you stop
by a table near the door to take a nectarine and some carrots for a late afternoon snack.

P A R T 6 | A P AT H F O R W A R D

POINTS OF INTERVENTION
Our investigation turned up a number
of points at which interventions could
occur. Throughout the report and
particularly in this section, you will see
icons to signal promising practices or
ideas in the field that pertain to these
points of intervention:
Procurement
Menu planning &
meal preparation
Eating environment
Commissary

Visitation

Education & awareness

Programming

Reentry

Oversight & feedback

As stated by the United Nations’
Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
Article 25, “Everyone has the right to a
standard of living adequate for the health
and well-being of himself and of his
family, including food.”

108

Could this be lunchtime in prison? As we asked systemsimpacted people and corrections staff around the country what
changes they would like to see in the experience of eating in
prison, they painted a clear vision that aligns with the scenario
above. More fresh vegetables and fruits, real meat, fish, and eggs,
providing essential nutrients in the form of whole foods rather
than relying on heavily processed foods and fortified beverages.
Food that’s appetizing and in portions large enough so that no
one goes hungry or feels compelled to engage in illicit activities
to get enough to eat. Some choice in what to eat to fit personal
preferences, cultural heritage, and health concerns. Kitchens
that are suitably staffed, equipped, and sanitary, and chow halls
as pleasant as officers’ dining areas. And to complement this
vision of food service: healthy and affordable commissary items
alongside access to basic kitchen equipment to safely prepare
snacks and simple meals, and space for families to eat good
meals together during visitation.
People who have spent years or decades in prison—and their
loved ones—recognize that this is what incarcerated people need
and deserve. As one person we surveyed emphasized, “Nobody
is looking for surf and turf in prison, but a basic nutritional meal
is a human right.” Healthy food is a human right, and the stakes
are especially high in confinement where a person’s access
to food is controlled and limited. Many of the corrections staff
and leadership we interviewed understand what constitutes a
nourishing meal (one they themselves would eat) but feel they
lack the resources and public mandate to make a significant
change. On top of this, the prevailing attitude within corrections—
and for that matter, in our broader culture—is that the status quo is
acceptable when it comes to the prison eating experience.
This vision of lunch in prison, neither outlandish nor
unreasonable, is still a world apart from mealtime in most
facilities across the country. As this series demonstrates, food
standards in prison are routinely lower compared with standards
in the free world. Nutritional guidelines and other policies
considered “adequate” are often far less than what a layperson

P A R T 6 | A P AT H F O R W A R D

109

When incarcerated
people routinely feel
humiliated by the food
available to them and
are often hungry and
malnourished, the
baseline by which the
profession measures
itself is clearly too low.

-

- - ---

-:=--~·::::..,;__- -::-:-----

'

1/ 1}
I ,

,\'

;~
,/

) 1.,

i

1'

\

would tolerate when selecting food for themselves or their
family. The fact that the quality of food in prison isn’t an issue
of public concern helps preserve the status quo. During the
COVID-19 pandemic, which has exposed the health perils and
degradations of mass incarceration for all to see, food and its
connection to physical health and overall well-being has been
barely a footnote—even as the quality, safety, and availability of
food in prisons plummeted, in some cases sparking riots.108
In prison, a person’s relationship with food is typically an
additional form of punishment on top of the penance of
confinement itself. Someone with a loved one in prison wrote to
us, “I can’t express enough how much people are aware of the
terrible food they are exposed to and how much that awareness
takes a toll on their mental and emotional health. … It brings
down morale, increases stress, and leaves people hopeless.”
It’s not surprising that prison food is so awful: prison populations
are unjustifiably large (which is beyond the control of facility
officials), there is constant pressure to cut costs, and still a sizable
portion of the public believes incarcerated people “deserve what
they get.” Corrections professionals who believe they’re doing
the best they can feeding people amid a host of constraints
are not wrong. But when incarcerated people routinely feel
humiliated by the food available to them and are often hungry and
malnourished, the baseline by which the profession measures
itself is clearly too low. Furthermore, the current approach to food
in prison misses key opportunities to use food proactively as a tool
for genuine rehabilitation and successful reentry.

P A R T 6 | A P AT H F O R W A R D

110

Raising standards, breaking with convention
While much of this series is dedicated to documenting the poor
quality of food in prison, and the policies and practices that
determine what ends up on a person’s tray, the report also draws
attention to individual facilities and state systems where leaders
are breaking with convention. They’re buying whole, fresh foods
from local producers; rethinking the chow hall atmosphere;
creating opportunities for families to cook and eat together as
part of visitation; and investing in food-related programming to
facilitate healing, encourage life-long healthy eating habits, and,
for those interested, to build marketable job skills.

No model for an
optimal—or even
acceptable—prison
food experience
currently exists in the
United States.

No model for an optimal—or even acceptable—prison food
experience currently exists in the United States. It’s not sufficient
to make a few small improvements and call it good enough. A
genuinely rehabilitative prison food experience must not only
foster physical and mental well-being, but also restore agency
to incarcerated individuals. Each of the promising initiatives
we highlight addresses just pieces of the problem, but each
calls attention to key points of intervention and to how we
can reshape the experience of eating in prison so that food
becomes the source of healing, health, and dignity that it’s
supposed to be. We hope this provides a helpful starting point
for corrections leaders who are inspired to raise standards and
break with convention.

Inspiration from across the globe
MENU PL ANNING &
ME AL PREPAR ATION

E ATING ENVIRONMENT

COMMISSARY

•
•
•

Corrections reformers across the U.S. have looked to
Scandinavian prisons, which approach incarceration with a
philosophy emphasizing humanity and healing, as potential
models for change. While these countries have vastly lower
incarceration rates—allowing them to focus their investments
in an intentional way, rather than doing the best they can to
warehouse thousands of people at low cost—we can still look
to them as examples of what is possible. Norway’s “radically

P A R T 6 | A P AT H F O R W A R D

111

humane” Halden Prison is famous for allowing people convicted
of violent crimes access to sharp knives to cook their own
meals.109 The healthy, whole ingredients the prison supplies,
such as fresh salmon and broccoli, are less well-known but
just as important. The guiding philosophy in Norway is that
healthy food is essential for healthy lives, and that one important
function of prison is to normalize healthy eating.
Residents prepare meals in open kitchens that form the heart of
the small-scale housing units where they live. One resident in
each unit is the designated cook and is paid as he would be for
any other job in the facility. Each person can also supplement
the food provided with items purchased from the prison
commissary, which stocks fresh produce, frozen meat, and an
array of other foods available at any Norwegian grocery store.
Secure prisons in Finland have dining halls that serve three
meals a day prepared by the same government entity that feeds
the military—food that is reportedly quite good and that prison
staff eat as well. Each housing unit also has a fully-equipped
kitchen where residents can cook for themselves with food
purchased from a well-stocked commissary.110

COMMISSARY

•

“Security risks are
always weighed, but
there is real value in a
person preparing food
on their own terms.”
— Tim Buchanan, former warden of
Noble Correctional Institution

To some U.S. corrections officials these may sound like fantasy
worlds, but others are taking small steps in this direction. At the
Noble Correctional Institution in Ohio, each housing unit has
its own small garden that residents plant, tend, and harvest,
sharing the produce and eating it when they wish. Some units
have George Foreman grills, toaster ovens, and prep tables
that accommodate more cooking from scratch than microwaves
and electric kettles, which are the only equipment available
to people in most prisons. “Security risks are always weighed,
but there is real value in a person preparing food on their own
terms,” explains Noble’s former warden, Tim Buchanan.

P A R T 6 | A P AT H F O R W A R D

112

What’s to be gained by transforming prison food
“Now that people
are getting better
nutrients, they sleep
better, eat better, feel
better, work better,
everything.”
— Commissioner Randall Liberty

Serving healthy, appealing meals for bodies with different
needs; harnessing the emotional benefits of an enjoyable meal,
especially one shared with others; and supporting initiatives
that make food the center of learning, healing, and health can
greatly improve people’s life outcomes both in prison and after
release. There are obvious health benefits. Healing nutritional
deficiencies, satiating hunger, nourishing the senses, and
restoring agency by giving people some choice in what they eat
can profoundly improve physical and mental health, which in
turn supports other rehabilitative efforts—improving people’s
chances for success after release. Commissioner Randall
Liberty, who has overseen positive changes in the amount of
fresh, local food served in the Maine Department of Corrections,
explained, “Now that people are getting better nutrients, they
sleep better, eat better, feel better, work better, everything.”
Beyond the benefits of consuming nutritious food, incarcerated
people who participate in high-quality food-related programs,
such as the gardening and culinary training programs described
in this report, find the process restorative and emerge with
marketable job skills. These positive effects ripple out to benefit
the communities people rejoin after release. Individuals in
sound physical and mental health are better able to find and
retain employment and contribute to their communities as
parents, family members, neighbors, and colleagues.111 Good
health and better eating habits among returning citizens lead
to improvements in community health that could lower local
healthcare costs.112
As we work to transform the ordeal of eating in confinement
into an experience that promotes health and wellness, we
also need to ensure that access to nutritious food and healthy
eating practices is supported after an individual walks out the
prison gates. A 2013 study of recently released individuals
found that 91% of respondents were food insecure, and noted
an association between food insecurity and engaging in

P A R T 6 | A P AT H F O R W A R D

113

INDIVIDUAL

What’s to be gained
Significant improvements to the
prison food experience could
spark the following potential
ripple effects.

PYR AMID

•

Enhanced physical and mental health

•

Restored sense of agency over one’s
own body/health; increased self-worth

•

Increased understanding of healthy
relationship with food

•

Safer and more secure facility

•

Less stressful environment for
both incarcerated people and
staff
Decreased spending on waste
removal and a more sustainable
facility

•

Overall, better equipped to rejoin
communities upon release

•

Potential for reduced rates of
recidivism

•

REENTRY

•

•

COMMUNITY

were food insecure.

Reduction in disciplinary issues

New/improved food-related skills
(cooking, gardening) that increase
employability

COMMUNITY

91% of respondents

•

•

SOCIETY

individuals found that

Decreased spending on medical
care and psychological services

Stronger connections to family/
loved ones on the outside

FACILITY

recently released

•

•

INDIVIDUAL

A 2013 study of

-

FACILITY

Returning citizens more prepared to
take their places as parents, family
members, neighbors, employees,
community members

•

Decreased health care costs borne by
families and taxpayers

•

Stronger local economies through
sourcing local food products

•

Safer communities

-

SOCIETY

•

Improved public health

•

Increased public safety

•

Lighter environmental footprint

•

Shift in cultural attitudes
toward incarcerated people
(humanization, reduced stigma)

behaviors like drug use and exchanging sex for money that not
only put one’s health at risk, but also increase chances of rearrest.113 Even so, some states still enforce limits on eligibility
for food stamps and other forms of financial assistance for
those with certain types of convictions.114 A system genuinely
committed to rehabilitation and recidivism reduction must
work with local policymakers, organizations, and businesses
to establish consistent access to healthy food for returning
community members. This can be achieved through multiple
channels, including government-supported programs like
the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and
community-based initiatives like Vermont’s Dismas Houses,
where formerly incarcerated individuals live, cook, and eat
alongside community members who have never experienced
incarceration.115

P A R T 6 | A P AT H F O R W A R D

Many food-related
security concerns,
such as exploitative
bartering and stealing
food from the kitchen—
actions motivated by
deprivation—are less
likely once incarcerated
people have access to
satisfying meals.

114

Improving the prison food experience reaps significant benefits
for facilities as well. Research demonstrates a link between
proper nutrition and lower levels of violence and aggression,
and suggests that when food in prison satiates hunger and
fulfills nutritional needs, incarcerated people are less inclined
to act out in anger, or to harm staff and one another, or to disrupt
facility operations.116 Many food-related security concerns,
such as exploitative bartering and stealing food from the
kitchen—actions motivated by deprivation—are less likely once
incarcerated people have access to satisfying meals. A healthy
relationship with food, for both incarcerated people and staff,
is a foundation for healthy relationships with people and a more
positive environment in general.

How do we get there?

Mass incarceration itself
heavily incentivizes a
certain kind of meal—
one that prioritizes low
cost and efficiency at the
expense of health and
dignity.

This report details the inadequacies and degradation of food in
prisons nationwide to a degree never done before. While there
are examples of promising practices that give us hope, the
magnitude of the problem is immense—without even accounting
for the thousands of jails and community confinement facilities
that fall outside the scope of this project and merit their own
attention and examination. The core of the problem is not overly
punitive or negligent leaders (though there are some). Mass
incarceration itself heavily incentivizes a certain kind of meal—
one that prioritizes low cost and efficiency at the expense of
health and dignity.
In our dozens of conversations with corrections staff and
leadership, we asked what they perceived as the biggest barrier
to providing better food in prison. While a few stated that they
were content with their food service operations, we most
frequently heard that departments were constrained by financial
resources—preventing them from purchasing better and fresher
food, adequately staffing kitchens, updating or purchasing new
equipment, or all of the above. Given these realities, and the fact
that these leaders lack the power to lower incarceration rates,

P A R T 6 | A P AT H F O R W A R D

115

How to reshape the
experience of eating in prison
We suggest the following strategies for
sparking, advancing, and sustaining a new
approach to food in prison.

CORRECTIONAL CULTURE
• Solicit feedback from incarcerated people and allow their concerns to
guide changes.
• Incentivize a food experience that supports wellness and rehabilitation.
• Educate all stakeholders about the role food plays in physical, mental,
and emotional well-being.
• Partner with allied professions and fields.
• Empower staff at all levels to be creative problem-solvers.
• End all food-related punishments.
• Request external oversight to ensure daily practice measures up to policy,
and ensure transparency by making reports accessible to the public.

AGENCY POLICY & PRACTICE
• Raise standards and change food policies accordingly.
• Develop menus featuring whole foods that are appealing and nourishing,
and that draw on the cultural heritages of incarcerated people.
• Buy more fresh foods locally and regionally.
• Commit to fair labor and food consumption practices on prison farms.

FACILITY POLICE & PRACTICE
• Do more cooking from scratch in suitably equipped kitchens.
• Serve staff and incarcerated people the same healthy, good-tasting food.
• Make dining halls and other environments welcoming, hospitable places
where eating is a pleasure.

BEYOND THE CHOW HALL
• Sell fresh and healthy foods at affordable prices in commissaries, and
provide incarcerated people with access to simple kitchens where they can
cook for themselves and others.
• Invest in nutrition education, gardening, and culinary programming as
practices for healing and long-term health, as well as job training.
• Make family meals a part of visitation practices.

P A R T 6 | A P AT H F O R W A R D

While this might
seem like a daunting
undertaking, corrections
officials don’t have to
(and can’t) do it alone.
There are untapped
resources at every level
to support the process.

116

it would be easy to turn to increased spending as a convenient
answer for solving the problem. However, we have seen that as
with any other attempt to reform the U.S. criminal justice system,
there is no one-size-fits-all solution. Some states will need to
spend more in the short term to significantly raise the standard
of food in prison, ideally by reallocating existing resources;
others can do far better with the resources already at their
disposal, and perhaps even save money.
As we have shared throughout this report, we believe there are
important reasons to create meals that are abundant in nutrition,
taste good, and are served with dignity. In this final section of
Eating Behind Bars, we offer steps that can get us closer to that
vision—an objective that will benefit all of us. While this might
seem like a daunting undertaking, corrections officials don’t
have to (and can’t) do it alone. Fortunately, there are untapped
resources at every level to support the process.

Starting from within
Given the hierarchical nature of corrections, shifts in culture
tend to come from leaders at the highest ranks. Only they have
the authority to enact policies and directives that break with
ingrained practices and habits. The fresh, local approach to food
service in the Maine Department of Corrections, for example,
was codified in January 2019 when Randall Liberty, who
grew up with an incarcerated parent, became Commissioner.
A Master Gardener and beekeeper, his efforts to integrate
these practices in the Maine State Prison during his time as
warden met with resistance and were small in scale. Liberty
has taken advantage of his position as Commissioner not
only to expand the gardening programs but also to increase
the amount of food that prisons statewide are required to
purchase from local producers—getting fresh, whole foods
onto the trays of incarcerated people while strengthening local
economies. Commissioner Liberty emphasized, “Our job is

P A R T 6 | A P AT H F O R W A R D

“Our job is about
rehabilitation,
redemption, and getting
busy healing those
wounds. Our job is to
reduce the frequency of
future victims. Our job
is to help these men and
women back to society.”
— Commissioner Randall Liberty

VISITATION

•

117

about rehabilitation, redemption, and getting busy healing those
wounds. Our job is to reduce the frequency of future victims. Our
job is to help these men and women back to society.”
The corrections leaders taking steps toward providing
nourishing food in a positive environment are part of a small
but growing number of high-ranking professionals rejecting
command-and-control style management for a “client-oriented”
approach that promotes healing and personal transformation.
As Ohio Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Director
Annette Chambers-Smith told us, “I believe in ‘There but for the
grace of God go I’. ... I’m trying to run this prison a little bit more
like my family.” A healthy relationship with food is at the center of
any thriving family.
A champion at the top is essential but not enough. For real
change to occur, staff at all levels need to be on board. As
in any profession, staff respond more positively to leaders
who solicit their input, listen with an open mind, and support
promising ideas—providing compliments and credit where
credit is due. When staff are invited to contribute, they not only
bring fresh ideas to the table, but also are more likely to buy
into new initiatives and become invested in their success. “I
believe that people are quicker to do what they come up with
themselves,” explained Chambers-Smith, who challenges staff
to think outside the box. That’s how the warden of one prison
decided to enhance family visitations by organizing a cookout
where everyone cooks and eats together. Chambers-Smith
makes it clear that she is open to adopting ideas that might be
considered unconventional in a prison. Some Ohio facilities now
allow residents to paint their cell a color of their choosing and
welcome family members to attend prison religious services.
In one higher-security facility, staff are beginning to implement
naturally soothing lavender-based aromatherapy in the hallways
to help relieve tension.
Perhaps most importantly, corrections leaders should listen—
really listen—to the people most impacted by the systems they
run. Anecdotally, this seems to happen more in smaller

P A R T 6 | A P AT H F O R W A R D

A culture that trains
corrections staff to
detach from the people
in their care has been
the status quo for
generations.

“You had those inmates
who would say stuff like,
‘I’m losing weight; y’all
need to give us more
food!’ but I just saw it
as conversation. I didn’t
equate that to what was
really going on.”
— former corrections staff

118

facilities, which may have the ability to be more responsive.
Regardless of the size, however, a culture that trains corrections
staff to detach from (and despise or distrust) the people in their
care has been the status quo for generations, leading to the
dehumanization of incarcerated people and the widespread
dismissal of their individual needs and collective concerns.
Research shows that corrections officers who approach their
work with a rehabilitative rather than punitive mindset find the
job less stressful.117 However, current and former corrections
staff told us how their professional training, both formal
and informal, cultivates a wariness of incarcerated people,
drumming into their heads that people who end up behind
bars are not to be trusted and will take advantage of officers
who appear soft. Staff are enculturated with the idea that any
complaint from someone who is incarcerated is the product
of bias against all staff and the prison itself, not something
to be taken seriously. This mindset instilled in corrections
staff is rooted in a system of “us versus them,” establishing an
emotional distance that allows abuse, including awful food, to go
unchecked.
Such training directly impacts the way many corrections staff
and leaders understand the issue of food in prison. A common
refrain among corrections staff is that “all inmates lie.” One
former officer explained, “I don’t think I connected the dots [at
the time]. You had those inmates who would say stuff like, ‘I’m
losing weight; y’all need to give us more food!’ but I just saw it as
conversation. I didn’t equate that to what was really going on.”
Her thought process, she shared with us, was that if a dietitian
said that the portions were adequate, then the dietitian was to be
trusted over the incarcerated person.
Any initiative to create a healthier, more rehabilitative eating
experience in prison must start by treating incarcerated people
as full human beings. Soliciting input in meaningful ways,
genuinely listening to their concerns, and taking concrete
actions for change can humanize incarcerated people and foster
a safer and less contentious environment for all.

P A R T 6 | A P AT H F O R W A R D

119

Working in partnership

EDUCATION &
AWARENESS

PROGR AMMING

PROCUREMENT

EDUCATION &
AWARENESS

•
•
•
•

External institutions provide expertise, community connections,
and in some cases funding to create and support innovative food
practices and food-related programming. Potential partners
range from other government agencies, to schools, local food
cooperatives, and trade associations. Corrections officials in
Washington State are working with the department of health
to educate staff and incarcerated people about the role of good
nutrition. The Master Gardener program at the Maine State
Prison operates in collaboration with the University of Maine’s
Cooperative Extension. Incarcerated participants produce fresh
vegetables for use in the prison kitchen and along the way
accrue knowledge, marketable skills, and a certification that can
help them find work in Maine’s diverse agricultural industry after
release. At Mountain View Correctional Facility, another prison in
Maine, a partnership with the nonprofit trade group Hospitality
Maine provides apprenticeships for graduates of the prison’s
esteemed culinary training program. And in Maryland, the new
Farm to Prison Project is helping to link correctional facilities
statewide to local urban and small-scale farms to source
fresh seasonal produce, for a three-fold impact: incarcerated
individuals will receive healthier, more appealing food;
partnerships based on food will humanize incarcerated people;
and supporting urban agriculture will help build capacity for
self-determination in communities affected by food apartheid.
Creating partnerships to run or facilitate culinary and other foodrelated programming is an established practice in prison, but
more can be done. In tandem with nourishing meals, culturallyrelevant nutrition education can make a life-long contribution to
better health for many incarcerated people and the families they’ll
eventually rejoin. Community-based models that could be adapted
for a correctional setting include that of Oldways, a Boston-based
nonprofit that develops interactive cooking and nutrition programs,
using reimagined food pyramids that highlight healthy eating from
different cultural traditions, including the African Heritage Diet and
the Latin American Heritage Diet.

P A R T 6 | A P AT H F O R W A R D

PROGR AMMING

PROCUREMENT

R AISING
AWARENESS
ABOUT GOOD
NUTRITION

•

EDUCATION &
AWARENESS

•
•

120

Even programs not specifically focused on food can become
pathways to better eating. Motherhood Beyond Bars provides
compassionate prenatal and postpartum support for pregnant
incarcerated women in two of Georgia’s state prisons. Diet is
a critical factor in giving a baby a good start in life. While staff
advocate for improvements in the meals the prison serves,
they’re making a small difference by bringing healthy food to the
monthly baby shower celebrations. “They don’t get a noon meal
on Fridays, so we do a kale salad, fresh fruit, yogurt, plus cake,”
explained Amy Ard, the program’s executive director.
The Center for Good Food Purchasing, which provides
structured support to help public institutions shift to more local,
healthy, fair, and environmentally sustainable procurement
practices, has begun partnering with a few correctional
agencies. The program encourages not only a commitment to
better procurement practices, but also a dedication to public
transparency—something sorely lacking in the corrections food
world. While improving procurement, clients become part of a
movement leveraging collective power to shift vendor practices.

The Washington Department of Corrections has joined forces
with the state department of health to bring nutrition education
inside prison walls. With a grant from the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention, the department of health developed a
toolkit to help food service managers bring meals into alignment
with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. It also contains
information about how to manage chronic disease through diet
and how food affects energy levels and mood. In the future,
the department of health hopes to offer educational sessions
to incarcerated people as an investment in long-term healthy
eating—nutritional knowledge they can share with their families
and communities upon release.

P A R T 6 | A P AT H F O R W A R D

121

Replicating others’ success

MENU PL ANNING &
ME AL PREPAR ATION

MENU PL ANNING &
ME AL PREPAR ATION
OVERSIGHT &
FEEDBACK

•
•
•

Prisons aren’t the only American institutions that routinely
serve unhealthy, unappetizing food, much of which ends up
wasted. The same is true of many public schools and hospitals,
for example. Food-related reforms in these and other largescale, bureaucratic institutions can be sources of inspiration
and concrete ideas. Many resources have already been
dedicated to improving the health profile of K-12 school meals,
especially in the wake of Michelle Obama’s Let’s Move campaign.
FoodCorps, a national service program established in 2010,
has placed service members in hundreds of schools across 18
states and in Washington, D.C. to provide hands-on gardening
and cooking lessons, team up with cafeteria staff to promote
healthy options, and advance a schoolwide culture of health.
They report that 73% of the schools they serve had healthier
school food environments at the end of the year. Schools across
the country have discovered simple initiatives to make meals
more appealing, such as flavor stations, which offer a variety of
low-sodium spice blends and condiments that allow students to
season food to their own tastes.
When chef Dan Giusti wanted a new challenge after cooking at
some of the most famous restaurants in the world, he decided
to transform public school food. His organization, Brigaid,
places culinary professionals in school kitchens to train local
staff in whole-foods scratch cooking that looks, smells, and
tastes delicious. Students can choose between the daily entrée,
a pasta dish, a salad, or a sandwich, all of which come with
vegetable and fruit side dishes. Giusti understands the barriers—
similar to those in the prison context—that make this a difficult
undertaking: a tight budget, strict nutritional guidelines, and a
wide range of palates to satisfy. Through trial and error, building
strong partnerships with school district officials, and engaging
with students, families, and staff every step of the way, Giusti
is succeeding. Brigaid’s approach to kitchen staff training,
meal choice, and taste-tasting, and its careful consideration of
feedback, could be adopted by prisons.

P A R T 6 | A P AT H F O R W A R D

MENU PL ANNING &
ME AL PREPAR ATION

MENU PL ANNING &
ME AL PREPAR ATION

REENTRY

MENU PL ANNING &
ME AL PREPAR ATION

•
•
•
•

122

These reforms may even save agencies money, depending on
current levels of spending. Isaiah Ruffin, a professional chef
who took on the challenge of improving public school food in
Alexandria, Virginia, showed that you can produce better food at
a substantially lower cost. In a trial program at one elementary
school, kitchen staff prepared all school breakfasts from scratch.
Ruffin found that 30% more students were eating breakfast
and that food costs dropped 85% thanks to the purchase of raw
ingredients like sweet potatoes, eggs, and apples rather than
prepackaged, highly-processed meal components.118
Food in some hospitals is undergoing a similar transformation.
Northwell Health, New York’s largest healthcare provider,
recently revamped its approach to hospital food. The company
hired an experienced executive chef who retrained hospital
food service staff in restaurant-quality culinary skills, and
brought in professional chefs who underwent nutritional
training. Chef Bruno Tison described challenges similar to
those faced by schools and correctional facilities: working
with a limited budget, creating recipes and menus that meet
strict nutritional guidelines, and managing initial resistance
from staff accustomed to old ways of doing things. The food
has received rave reviews from staff and from patients and
their family members who are grateful for a comforting meal
during a difficult time. And for low-income patients returning
to communities where fresh food is scarce, an on-site “food
pharmacy” provides imperfect fruits and vegetables sourced
from local vendors to anyone whose doctor prescribes more
fresh produce in their diet—a model that could be adapted to
smooth the re-entry process for people leaving prison.
Even some providers of food assistance are taking a new
approach. Miriam’s Kitchen serves meals to people without
stable housing and works to end chronic homelessness in
Washington, D.C. Executive Chef Cheryl Bell understands the
effect of good food on a person’s outlook and on their physical
health. When someone is “not in a great space” and is preparing
to meet with their caseworker, Bell explained, a nourishing meal

P A R T 6 | A P AT H F O R W A R D

“Food facilitates
good moods,
good memories,
good emotions,
which steamrolls
into something
positive and
productive rather
than negative.”
— Chef Cheryl Bell

123

can change their attitude entirely: “Food facilitates good
moods, good memories, good emotions, which steamrolls
into something positive and productive rather than negative.”
In contrast to many shelters and soup kitchens, Bell and her
team prepare delicious dishes that she herself enjoys: orangecardamom French toast with fresh fruit, for example, and periperi turkey with curry rice and salad. Her “restaurant-quality
comfort food” routinely features salads, whole grains, flavorful
cooked vegetables, high-quality protein, and seasonal fruit;
and people are afforded the dignity to choose which items go on
their plates.

Joining forces with potential allies
The need to change prison food resides at the crossroads of
several active social movements, yet has received little attention
or urgency. This work connects closely with the movements for
environmental sustainability, racial justice, labor rights, criminal
justice reform, and food justice. The food justice movement
is expanding access to healthy foods that are affordable and
culturally resonant under the banner of food sovereignty—the
idea that all people should have access to nourishing food
and be able to define their own food systems.119 While this
movement has not yet reached widely inside correctional
facilities, the community gardens, mobile farmer’s markets,
incubator kitchens, food co-ops, and other initiatives in outside
communities could be adapted to work in prisons with broadly
shared benefits. When correctional facilities purchase fresh food
from local producers, they are also protecting the environment
and strengthening local economies.

Intersecting
movements

FOOD
JUSTICE

RACIAL
JUSTICE

Prison food sits at the nexus of
many movements for justice
ENVIRONMENTAL
SUSTAINABILITY

LABOR
RIGHTS

CRIMINAL
JUSTICE REFORM

P A R T 6 | A P AT H F O R W A R D

People of color are
disproportionately
incarcerated and
also more likely to
experience food
insecurity both
before and after
incarceration.

124

To date, advocates working to improve conditions of
confinement have focused on other abusive practices—notably
solitary confinement, egregiously poor healthcare and
exploitative co-pays, and exorbitant fees for phone calls and
emails. But it is abundantly clear from our research that prisons’
poor quality of food and degrading eating environments are just
as important to the health and dignity of incarcerated people.
People of color are disproportionately incarcerated and also
more likely to experience food insecurity both before and after
incarceration—forms of structural racism well known at this point.
Black and brown communities also have a rich history of
embracing healthy food to resist oppression, organize for
change, and reclaim wellness—and they continue to do so
today. The Black Church Food Security Network currently
connects congregations to resources to advance food and land
sovereignty.120 Sean Sherman, the lauded “Sioux Chef,” and
other Native food activists have ignited a movement to facilitate
indigenous food access and reclaim health and wealth in Native
communities through food-related enterprise.121 A wave of
Latinx entrepreneurs in California has popularized traditional
plant-based foods as an antidote to the soaring rates of diabetes,
hypertension, and cancer in their communities—consequences
of an imposed diet high in sugar and white flour.122 And Sikh
gudwaras (places of worship) regularly feed crowds in need
of nourishment. As of June 2020, one gudwara in Queens, New
York, had served more than 145,000 free healthy, homemade
meals over the course of ten weeks to healthcare workers,
people experiencing food insecurity, and protestors marching
against police brutality.123 Leaders from these communities have
a wealth of expertise in providing the kind of real nourishment
that heals bodies, minds, and spirits, and they offer valuable
insights and actionable strategies for change.

P A R T 6 | A P AT H F O R W A R D

Coda: Why focus on food when the
underlying problem is mass incarceration?
The quality of the food we eat, and the role of food in our lives, affects every aspect
of our being: our physical health, mental acuity, emotions, identity, self-worth,
relationships with others, and more. Quite simply, a person cannot grow and evolve
without meals that nourish body, mind, spirit, and human relationships.
Making food a source of health, healing, and dignity in prison won’t stop the
fundamental injustice of mass incarceration and the racism that underlies it. But
focusing on food isn’t a distraction. Providing far better food to the more than one
million people confined in prisons across the country is first and foremost a basic
human right.
Garnering the public support necessary to reshape the prison eating experience will
also humanize incarcerated people, perhaps especially the Black and brown people
who are routinely dehumanized both in prison and in the dominant culture overall.
And human dignity is the foundation upon which we can build a far less punitive
country, one in which no one is defined by the worst thing they’ve ever done, and
where society is capable of embracing people who have caused harm. Disrupting the
narrative that everyone in prison is a menace to society is a necessary step in shifting
resources away from incarceration to prevention, harm reduction, and community
needs.
Currently, the prison food experience functions as a cog in a debilitating and
degrading justice system. All of society can gain by using food as a tool to restore
health and support rehabilitation instead. This report is just one step toward ending
the hidden punishment of food in prison. We intend to take what we’ve learned to
departments of correction, policymakers, advocates, and others across the country
to help raise awareness about what’s at stake and to advocate for meaningful change
to food-related policies and practices in correctional facilities nationwide. Even
as we work toward dismantling a system that relies on incarceration to address
harm, we will support incarcerated people in getting the quality of food and eating
experience they need and deserve.

125

E N D N O T E S | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

126

Endnotes
1 Benoit, E. (2020). Exploring Connections Between Prison Food and Food Deserts: An Analysis of Formerly Incarcerated
People’s Experiences. [Master’s thesis, The Evergreen State College.] Malcolm Stilson Archives and Special Collections.
2 Schiraldi, V., & Ziedenberg, J. (2000). The Punishing Decade: Prison and Jail Estimates at the Millennium. Justice Policy
Institute. Link here
3 Kaeble, D. (2018). Time Served in State Prison, 2016. U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics. Link here; Jones,
A. (2018). Correctional Control 2018: Incarceration and supervision by state. Prison Policy Initiative. Link here
4 Ernersson, A., Nystrom, F. H., & Lindstrom, T. (2010). Long-term increase of fat mass after a four week intervention with fast
food based hyper-alimentation and limitation of physical activity. Nutrition & Metabolism, 7(68). Link here
5 Childs, C. E., Calder, P. C., & Miles, E. A. (2019). Diet and Immune Function. Nutrients, 11(8), 1933. Link here
6 Gesch, C. B., Hammond, S. M., Hampson, S. E., Eves, A., & Crowder, M. J. (2002). Influence of supplementary vitamins,
minerals and essential fatty acids on the antisocial behaviour of young adult prisoners. The British Journal of Psychiatry,
181(1), 22-28. Link here
7 Hughes, T., & Wilson, D. (2002). Reentry Trends In The U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Link here
8 Incarcerated Workers Organizing Committee & Research Action Cooperative. (2018). Cruel and Usual: A National Prisoner
Survey of Prison Food and Health Care Quality. Link here
9 Incarcerated Workers Organizing Committee & Research Action Cooperative. (2018).
10 Draper, R. (1996, May). The Great Texas Prison Mess. Texas Monthly. Link here
11 Gill, L. (2020, June 15). Grim stories from inside an Arkansas prison capture the toll of COVID-19. The Appeal. Link here;
Associated Press. (2020, March 26). Indiana’s inmates still eating meals together amid pandemic. KRCR News. Link here
12 Hausman, S. (2020, June 4). Prison Food and Medical Care Suffer During COVID-19 Pandemic. WVTF. Link here
13 Grego, B. (2020, April 16). Family members express concern about conditions at Belmont correctional institution. WTOV9.
Link here. The Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections stated to us that they moved to two meals to reduce
movement and opportunities for infection, and that this change was accompanied by an overall increase in daily calorie counts
and a focus on offering the most popular items.
14 Ceballos, A. (2020, July 24). COVID-19 toll passes 1,000 at Columbia Correctional. News4JAX. Link here; Ford, H. (2020,
August 6). More families allege inmates in Georgia prisons have little access to proper food and hygiene. 11Alive. Link here
15 Blakinger, K. (2020, May 11). Ewwwww, what is that? The Marshall Project. Link here
16 Hausman, S. (2020, June 4).
17 Egan, P. (2020, June 18). Coronavirus sharply reduces supply of popular ramen noodles in Michigan prisons.
Detroit Free Press. Link here
18 Aviv, R. (2020, June 15). Inside a prison where the coronavirus pandemic has become a death sentence. The New Yorker.
Link here
19 Brody, J. (2020, April 20). How Poor Diet Contributes to Coronavirus Risk. The New York Times. Link here
20 Lyon, E. (2019, January ). Washington State Prisoners Protest Poor Food. Prison Legal News. Link here; Prison Voice
Washington. (2016). Correcting Food Policy in Washington Prisons: How the DOC Makes Healthy Food Choices Impossible for
Incarcerated People & What Can Be Done. Link here

E N D N O T E S | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

127

21 For example, the Iowa Department of Corrections requires its facilities to serve 16 ounces of a fortified beverage daily, and the
Florida Department of Corrections serves one cup of fortified tea at lunch and one cup of fortified beverage at dinner. See Iowa
Department of Corrections. (2015). Food Service Business Rules.; Florida Department of Corrections. (2018). Adult Master
Menu FY 2018-2019.
22 Hardy, K. (2016, June). Nutrition Services in Correctional Facilities. Today’s Dietitian, 18(6), 32.
23 Collins, S. A., & Thompson, S. H. (2012). What Are We Feeding Our Inmates? Journal of Correctional Health Care, 18(3),
210-218. Link here
24 Afshin, A., Sur, P. J., Fay, K. A., Cornaby, L., Ferrara, G., Salama, J. S., Mullany, E. C., Abate, K. H., Abbafati, C., Abebe, Z.,
Afarideh, M., Aggarwal, A., Agrawal, S., Akinyemiju, T., Alahdab, F., Bacha, U., Bachman, V. F., Badali, H., Badawi, A., ...
Murray, C. J. L. (2019). Health Effects of Dietary Risks in 195 Countries, 1990–2017: A Systematic Analysis for the Global
Burden of Disease Study 2017. The Lancet (393), 1958-1972. Link here
25 Jacobs, A. (2019, April 3). Eat Your Veggies: Study Finds Poor Diets Linked to One in Five Deaths. The New York Times.
Link here
26 Francis, H. & Stevenson, R. (2013). The longer-term impacts of Western diet on human cognition and the brain. Appetite, 63,
119-128. Link here
27 Ernersson, A., Nystrom, F. H., & Lindstrom, T. (2010). Long-term increase of fat mass after a four week intervention with fast
food based hyper-alimentation and limitation of physical activity. Nutrition & Metabolism, 7(68). Link here
28 Maruschak, L., Berzofsky, M., & Unangst, J. (2016, October 4). Medical problems of state and federal prisoners and jail
inmates, 2011-12. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Link here
29 Fletcher, G., Dawes, J., & Spano, M. (2014). The Potential Dangers of Using Rapid Weight Loss Techniques. Strength and
Conditioning Journal, 36(2), 45-48. Link here
30 Incarcerated Workers Organizing Committee & Research Action Cooperative. (2018). Cruel and Usual: A National Prisoner
Survey of Prison Food and Health Care Quality. Link here
31 Marlow, M. A., Luna-Gierke, R. E., Griffin, P. M., & Vieira, A. R. (2017). Foodborne Disease Outbreaks in Correctional
Institutions–United States, 1998-2014. American Journal of Public Health, 107(7), 1150-1156. Link here
32 Incarcerated Workers Organizing Committee & Research Action Cooperative. (2018).
33 Meyer, B. J., Byrne, M. K., Collier, C., Parletta, N., Crawford, D., Winberg, P. C., Webster, D., Chapman, K., Thomas, G., Dally,
J., Batterham, M., Farquhar, I., Martin, A.M., & Grant, L. (2015). Baseline Omega-3 Index Correlates with Aggressive and
Attention Deficit Disorder Behaviours in Adult Prisoners. PLOS ONE, 10(3). Link here; Crime and Nourishment: Cause for a
Rethink? Prison Service Journal, 182, 3-9.
34 Wallner, B., & Machatschke, I. H. (2009). Influence of Nutrition on Aggression. CAB Reviews: Perspectives in Agriculture,
Veterinary Science, Nutrition and Natural Resources 4(75). Link here
35 Schiffman, R. (2019, March 28). Can What We Eat Affect How We Feel? The New York Times. Link here
36 Kanarek, R. (1997). Psychological effects of snacks and altered meal frequency. British Journal of Nutrition, 77(S1), 105-118.
Link here
37 Wolff, N., & Shi, J. (2012). Childhood and Adult Trauma Experiences of Incarcerated Persons and Their Relationship to Adult
Behavioral Health Problems and Treatment. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 9(5), 19081926. Link here; Jäggi, L. J., Mezuk, B., Watkins, D. C., & Jackson, J. S. (2016). The Relationship between Trauma, Arrest, and
Incarceration History among Black Americans: Findings from the National Survey of American Life. Society and Mental Health,
6(3), 187-206. Link here

E N D N O T E S | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

128

38 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2020, April 3). Preventing Adverse Childhood Experiences. Link here
39 Leah’s Pantry. (2020, April 14-15). Trauma-Sensitive Nutrition Training [Webinar].
40 Leah’s Pantry (2020, April 14-15).
41 Leah’s Pantry (2020, April 14-15).
42 Wiss, D. (2019). The Role of Nutrition in Addiction Recovery: What We Know and What We Don’t. In Danovitch, I. & Mooney, L.
J. (Eds.), The Assessment and Treatment of Addiction: Best Practices and New Frontiers (pp. 21-42). Elsevier.
43 The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University. (2010). Behind Bars II: Substance Abuse and
America’s Prison Population. Link here
44 Jenkins, R. D. (2016). Landscaping in Lockup: The Effects of Gardening Programs on Prison Inmates [Master’s thesis, Arcadia
University]. ScholarWorks@Arcadia.; Waitkus, K. E. (2004). The impact of a garden program on the physical environment
and social climate of a prison yard at San Quentin State Prison [Master’s thesis, Pepperdine University]. Pepperdine Digital
Commons.
45 Incarcerated Workers Organizing Committee & Research Action Cooperative. (2018).
46 Stern, R. (2020, August 8). Arizona Prisons Are Replacing Kosher and Halal Meals With Vegan Food. Phoenix New Times.
Link here
47 Saleh, M. (2019, May 25). Virginia prisons putting up obstacles to Ramadan observance. The Intercept. Link here; Resnack, J.
(2019, September 6). Civil liberties group, state of Alaska settle suit over meals for Muslim inmates. Alaska Public Media.
Link here
48 Raskin, H. (2020, December 14). Feeding the prison system: Some inmates buy way around ‘institutional cooking’. The Post
and Courier. Link here
49 Incarcerated Workers Organizing Committee & Research Action Cooperative. (2018).
50 Mooney, C. (2018, April 18). The staggering environmental footprint of all the food that we just throw in the trash. The
Washington Post. Link here
51 Barchitta, M., Maugeri, A., Favara, G., Magnano San Lio, R., Evola, G., Agodi, A., & Basile, G. (2019). Nutrition and Wound
Healing: An Overview Focusing on the Beneficial Effects of Curcumin. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 20(5),
1119. Link here
52 Ulmer, J. T., & Steffensmeier, D. (2014). The Age and Crime Relationship: Social Variation, Social Explanations.. In K. M.
Beaver, J. C. Barnes, & B. B. Boutwell (Eds.), The Nurture Versus Biosocial Debate in Criminology: On the Origins of Criminal
Behavior and Criminality (pp. 377-396). SAGE Publications Inc. Link here
53 Versteeg, R. I., Stenvers, D. J., Kalsbeek, A., Bisschop, P. H., Serlie, M. J., & La Fleur, S. E. (2016). Nutrition in the Spotlight:
Metabolic Effects of Environmental Light. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society (75), 451-463. Link here
54 Graziose, M. M., Koch, P. A., Wolf, R., Gray, H. L., Trent, R., & Contento, I. R. (2019). Cafeteria noise exposure and fruit and
vegetable consumption at school lunch: A cross-sectional study of elementary students. Appetite (136), 130-136. Link here;
Spence, C. (2014). Noise and its impact on the perception of food and drink. Flavour (3). Link here
55 Porges, S. W. (2017). The pocket guide to the polyvagal theory: The transformative power of feeling safe. WW Norton & Co.
56 Bench, L. L., & Allen, T. D. (2003). Investigating the Stigma of Prison Classification: An Experimental Design. The Prison
Journal, 83(4), 367-382.

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

129

57 Weinhold B. (2007). A Spreading Concern: Inhalational Health Effects of Mold. Environmental Health Perspectives, 115(6),
A300–A305. Link here; Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. (2014). Polychlorinated Biphenyls - ToxFAQs.
Division of Toxicology and Human Health Sciences. Link here
58 ACA Standard 4-4328 states that no more than 14 hours should elapse between the evening meal and breakfast, although
“variations may be allowed based on weekend and holiday food service demands provided basic nutritional goals are met.”
[See American Correctional Association. (2008). ACA Standards for Adult Correctional Institutions. In B. A. Wakeen (ed.),
Nutrition and Foodservice Management in Correctional Facilities: A Guide to Menus, Nutrition, Serving, Protocol, and Security
(3rd edition, pp. 17-23). American Dietetic Association.]
59 Godvin, M. (2019, April 11). Money Changed Everything for Me in Prison. The Marshall Project. Link here
60 Gibson-Light, M. (2018). Ramen Politics: Informal Money and Logics of Resistance in the Contemporary American Prison.
Qualitative Sociology, 41, 199-220. Link here
61 For more about commissary cooking as a site of resistance, see the work of Dr. Amy Smoyer, as well as the many sources in
her Prison Foodways Bibliography.
62 Campbell, E., Hudson, H., Webb, K., & Crawford, P. B. (2011). Food Preferences of Users of the Emergency Food System.
Journal of Hunger & Environmental Nutrition, 6(2), 179-187. Link here
63 Crossroads Correctional Center. (2013). Food Visit Guidelines. Link here; Arizona Department of Corrections. (2017). Arizona
Department of Corrections Department Order Manual. Link here
64 Friedmann, A. (2014, April). Lowering Recidivism through Family Communication. Prison Legal News. Link here
65 Ganeva, T. (2020, August 6). Flimsy plastic knives, a single microwave, and empty popcorn bags: How 50 inmates inside a
Michigan prison prepared a feast to celebrate the life of George Floyd. The Counter. Link here
66 American Correctional Association. (2008). ACA Standards for Adult Correctional Institutions. In B. A. Wakeen (ed.), Nutrition
and Foodservice Management in Correctional Facilities: A Guide to Menus, Nutrition, Serving, Protocol, and Security (3rd
edition, pp. 17-23). American Dietetic Association.
67 Out of the 35 state departments of correction that responded to our survey, 25 reported that they consult with a nutrition
professional in the process of developing menus.
68 Alaska Department of Corrections. (2016). Food Service Standards. Link here; Alaska Department of Corrections. (2018).
Food Service Safety and Sanitation. Link here; Alaska Department of Corrections. (2019). Special and/or Religious Diets and
Meals. Link here
69 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services & U.S. Department of Agriculture. (2015). Dietary Guidelines for Americans,
2015-2020. 8th Edition. Link here
70 Florida Department of Corrections. (n.d.). Inmate Menus. Link here
71 Camplin, E. (2017). Prison Food in America. Rowman & Littlefield.
72 Texas Department of Criminal Justice. (2018, December). Herb growing competition showcases gardening, culinary skills.
Link here
73 Reese, A., & Carr, R. (2020, June 19). Op-ed: Overthrowing the Food System’s Plantation Paradigm. Civil Eats. Link here
74 Mancini, M. J. (1996). One Dies, Get Another: Convict Leasing in the American South, 1866-1928. University of South Carolina
Press.
75 Mintz, S., & McNeil, S. (2018). Convict Lease System. Digital History. University of Houston. Link here

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

130

76 Aviv, R. (2020, June 15). Punishment by Pandemic. The New Yorker. Link here
77 Aviv, R. (2020, June 15).
78 This commitment is in response to Public Law 667 (2020), put forth in LD 1167AM by Rep. Craig Hickman (D-Winthrop), which
became law June 16, 2020.
79 Sawyer, W. (2017, April 10). How much do incarcerated people earn in each state? Prison Policy Initiative. Link here
80 Incarcerated Workers Organizing Committee & Research Action Cooperative. (2018).
81 Beck, A., Harrison, P., Berzofsky, M., Caspar, R., & Krebs, C. (2010). Sexual Victimization in Prisons and Jails Reported by
Inmates, 2008-09. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Link here. (This is the most recent BJS report that includes location of
incidents as part of the survey results.)
82 Ben-Moshe, K., Caplan, J., Ridberg, R., Stevenson, J., & Lee, M. (2016). California State Government Food Procurement
Policies and Practices. California Strategic Growth Council. Link here
83 Stickney, R., & Devine, R. (2016, May 25). Cost of School Lunches to Increase for San Diego Unified School District. NBC 7 San
Diego. Link here
84 Ben-Moshe, K., Caplan, J., Ridberg, R., Stevenson, J., & Lee, M. (2016).
85 Brennan Center for Justice. (2019, September 9). Is Charging Inmates to Say in Prison Smart Policy? Link here
86 Washington State Office of Financial Management. (2020). Department of Corrections. Link here
87 For an example of gross negligence in medical services, see Schwartzapfel, B. (2018, February 26). How Bad is Prison Health
Care? Depends on Who’s Watching. The Marshall Project. Link here
88 Scrafford, C. G., Bi, X., Multani, J. K., Murphy, M. M., Schmier, J. K., & Barraj, L. M. (2018). Health Economic Evaluation
Modeling Shows Potential Health Care Cost Savings with Increased Conformance with Healthy Dietary Patterns among Adults
in the United States. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 119(4), 599-616. Link here
89 Lagasse, J. (2017, May 8). Geisinger’s touts food-centric diabetes program The Fresh Food Pharmacy. Healthcare Finance
News. Link here
90 Sawyer, W., & Wagner, P. (2020, March 24). Mass incarceration: The Whole Pie 2020. Prison Policy Initiative. Link here
91 Gerstein, M., & Oosting, J. (2018, February 7). State set to end private prison food service. The Detroit News. Link here
92 Perkins, T. (2018, August 20). Michigan’s Failed Effort to Privatize Prison Kitchens and the Future of Institutional Food. Civil
Eats. Link here; Egan, P. (2019, May 23). Problem-plagued prison kitchens better after private contracts end, officials say.
Detroit Free Press. Link here; Requarth, T. (2019, April 30). How Private Equity Is Turning Public Prisons Into Big Profits. The
Nation. Link here
93 S.C. Department of Health and Environmental Control. (2016). Retail Food Establishment Inspection Report: Turbeville
Correctional Center. Link here; Raskin, H. (2016, December 14). Feeding the prison system: Some inmates buy way around
‘institutional cooking’. The Post and Courier. Link here
94 American Correctional Association. (2008). ACA Standards for Adult Correctional Institutions. In B. A. Wakeen (ed.), Nutrition
and Foodservice Management in Correctional Facilities: A Guide to Menus, Nutrition, Serving, Protocol, and Security (3rd
edition, pp. 17-23). American Dietetic Association.

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

131

95 Crabapple, M., & Williams, M. (2020, February 27). Welcome to ‘The Zo’ - Episode 2: Adaptation [Video]. The Marshall
Project. Link here
96 Kaul, P., Donley, G., Cavataro, B., Benavides, A., Kincaid, J., & Chatham, J. (2015). Prison and Jail Grievance Policies: Lessons
from a Fifty-State Survey. Michigan Law Prison Information Project. Link here
97 West Virginia’s grievance policy, for example, states that the “inmate may only attach one 8.5 x 11 inch page with writing
on a single side. Only one staple may be used to affix the pages together. The inmate may not tear, fold, or affix tape to the
forms, except that the forms may be folded and placed into a number 10 envelope.” For more information on the complexity
of grievance policies across the country, see the Michigan Law Prison Information Project’s report, Prison and Jail Grievance
Policies: Lessons from a Fifty-State Survey.
98 The University of Michigan Policy Clearinghouse. (2014). AZ Facilities Grievance Appeals 1/1/2004 to 6/30/2014. Link here
99 Bernstein, M. (2019, July 23). Judge tosses ‘bad food’ class action suit filed by Oregon prison inmates. The Oregonian.
Link here
100 Smith, J. (2019, October 4). State’s prison food cruel, unusual, federal lawsuit says. The Daily Journal. Link here
101 Hausman, S. (2018, March 22). Virginia Prisoner Sues Over Food Behind Bars. WVTF. https://www.wvtf.org/post/virginiaprisoner-sues-over-food-behind-bars#stream/0; Wood v. Hunt et al. Case No. 7:17CV00289. (Western District of Virginia,
Aug. 20, 2018). Link here
102 Associated Press. (2019, April 7). California inmates detail prison conditions of maggots, mice falling in dining hall. NBC
News. Link here; Clarke, M. (2019, August). Habeas Petition Granted Over Failing Roof, Unsanitary Conditions at California
Prison. Prison Legal News. Link here
103 Sokol, C. (2020, April 25). Washington DOC Sues Federal Government Over Chemicals That Tainted Food From Airway
Heights Prison. The Daily Chronicle. Link here
104 American Correctional Association. (2008).
105 Many state policies specify that the nutraloaf diet is not to exceed seven days; however, after one day of normal meal service,
the nutraloaf diet can be resumed for another seven days. For an example, see North Carolina Department of Public Safety,
Prisons. (2017, August 1). Special Management Meals.
106 Yale Law School. (2018, October 10). ASCA and Liman Center Release Two New Reports on Solitary Confinement. Link here
107 Brown, M. (2019, September 13). ‘I will not be silent’: Alabama prisoner alleges retaliation after speaking to media. The
Montgomery Advertiser. Link here
108 The following stories by the Marshall Project and The New Yorker are notable exceptions: Blakinger, K. (2020, May 11).
Ewwwww, what is that? The Marshall Project. Link here; Aviv, R. (2020, June 15). Inside a prison where the coronavirus
pandemic has become a death sentence. The New Yorker. Link here
109 Benko, J. (2015, March 26). The Radical Humaneness of Norway’s Halden Prison. The New York Times Magazine. Link here
110 Bowman, M. (personal communication, October 10, 2019).
111 Lagomarsino, E., & Spiganti, A. (2020). No gain in pain: psychological well-being, participation, and wages in the BHPS. The
European Journal of Health Economics, 21(9), 1375–1389. Link here.
112 Jardim, T. V., Mozaffarian, D., Abrahams-Gessel, S., Sy, S., Lee, Y., Liu, J., Huang, Y., Rehm, C., Wilde, P., Micha, R., & Gaziano,
T. A. (2019). Cardiometabolic disease costs associated with suboptimal diet in the United States: A cost analysis based on a
microsimulation model. PLOS Medicine 16(12), e1002981. Link here

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

132

113 Wang, E. A., Zhu, G. A., Evans, L., Carroll-Scott, A., Desai, R., & Fiellin, L. E. (2013). A pilot study examining food insecurity
and HIV risk behaviors among individuals recently released from prison. AIDS Education and Prevention, 25(2), 112-123.
Link here
114 Born, M. (2018, June 20). In Some States, Drug Felons Still Face Lifetime Ban On SNAP Benefits. National Public Radio.
Link here; Francois, W. D. (2018, July 18). Returning to Life Outside Prison—Without Food on the Table. Civil Eats. Link here;
Hager, E. (2016, February 4). Six states where felons can’t get food stamps. The Marshall Project. Link here
115 Phillips, J. (2019, February 13). Breaking bread & stereotypes with formerly incarcerated Vermonters. Innovative Education
in VT. Link here.
116 Gesch, C. B., Hammond, S. M., Hampson, S. E., Eves, A., & Crowder, M. J. (2002). Influence of supplementary vitamins,
minerals and essential fatty acids on the antisocial behaviour of young adult prisoners: Randomised, placebo-controlled
trial. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 181(1), 22-28. Link here
117 Dowden, C. & Tellier, C. (2004). Predicting Work-Related Stress in Correctional Officers: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of
Criminal Justice, 32(1), 31-47.
118 Ruffin, I. (personal communication, January 21, 2020).
119 U.S. Food Sovereignty Alliance. (n.d.). Food Sovereignty. Link here
120 The Black Church Food Security Network. (2020). Home Page. Link here
121 North American Traditional Indigenous Food Systems (NāTIFS). (2020). Home Page. Link here
122 Medina-Cadena, M. (2017, August 7). La Cultura Cura: How Latinos Are Reclaiming Their Ancestral Diets. Smithsonian
Center for Folklife & Cultural Heritage Magazine. Link here
123 Krishna, P. (2020, June 8). How to Feed Crowds in a Protest or Pandemic? The Sikhs Know. The New York Times. Link here

M E T H O D O L O G Y | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

133

Methodology
The goal of this investigation was
to generate a deep understanding
of the landscape, experience, and
human impacts of prison food in the
United States.
In particular, we wanted to examine the factors
that play a role in what food is served in prisons,
identify the barriers for agencies or facilities
that want to provide better food, and learn about
existing best practices. Through this investigation,
the research team wanted to examine how the
quality, quantity, and experience of food in prison
affect physical health, mental well-being, and
human dignity; and to explore how food can be
used as a tool for encouraging rehabilitation,
supporting reentry, and reducing recidivism.
This report focuses on state facilities; however,
there are many different facility types, including
federal, local, immigrant and juvenile detention
facilities, and lockups. Some of the individuals
surveyed, interviewed, and engaged in focus
groups had exposure and experiences in facilities
other than state adult facilities. Throughout this
process, our research team visited two jails and
one juvenile detention facility to develop context
and information. Although our data collection
focused on state facilities, it is important to
acknowledge that some information provided by
respondents may have been impacted by their
experiences with various correctional institutions.

Our data
We relied on a myriad of data sources for this
report, including:
• Interviews, focus groups, and surveys
conducted with those who have experienced
incarceration firsthand, as well as their families
and loved ones.
• A systematic review of food-related policies,
procedures, and practices at correctional
agencies across the U.S.
• Site visits and interviews with leaders of
correctional facilities and key decision-makers
at the state level.
• A cross-disciplinary literature review and
consultations with experts in nutrition, mental
health, public health, law, economics, sociology,
and cultural studies, and those transforming
institutional eating in other sectors and countries.

Interviews and surveys with individuals
who have experienced incarceration, and
their families
In our investigation, we wanted to center and
amplify the voices of those most impacted
by the system: people who have experienced

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

incarceration, and their loved ones. To that end,
we created a survey and conducted in-depth
interviews and focus groups to understand their
experiences regarding food in prison.
The survey asked formerly incarcerated people
and their loved ones about their (or their loved
ones’) experiences eating food in prison and how
that impacted their lives both during and after
incarceration. We received 250 responses from
formerly incarcerated people and 230 responses
from family members and loved ones. The survey
responses included people who served time in
state, federal, or local facilities across 41 states,
the majority of whom had been released within the
last five years.
We used the survey to identify formerly
incarcerated interviewees from around the
country. While the survey was anonymous, we
included an optional question at the end for those
interested in being interviewed to leave their name
and contact information. We selected interviewees
across age, incarceration length, geographic
location, race, ethnicity, and gender, as well as
those who indicated they had certain experiences
like working in the kitchen, obtaining a special
diet, or serving time in solitary confinement.
Through this process, we conducted 11 in-depth
interviews. In these interviews, which ranged
from 60 to 90 minutes, we explored the nuances
of eating in prison and its physical, mental,
social, and emotional consequences, as well as
suggestions for how to change it. All interviewees
were compensated for their time. In one state,
after authorization by facility leaders and the
deputy commissioner, we conducted focus groups
in two facilities.

134

Systematic review of food-related policies
To understand the operational landscape of food
in prison, we completed a thorough review of food
policies and practices in all 50 states. We focused
specifically on state facilities, which hold more
than half of the U.S. incarcerated population.
We studied the available information regarding
food service operations and menu planning,
procurement, commissaries, and handbooks
provided to incarcerated people.
While this information gave us a basic
understanding of the operational parameters of
serving food in prison, the policies provide an
incomplete picture. Most policies are publicly
available online (though some are only available
by request); however, the amount of details
provided can vary greatly by state. Because of this,
with the support of the Correctional Leadership
Association, we created and administered a survey
raising the questions to which we could not find
answers in policy documents. The association
includes representation from all state correctional
departments, and we received responses from
35 states.

Site visits and interviews with state
corrections staff
To complement formal documentation and
research, we interviewed 43 corrections officials
in 12 states, including frontline staff (including
food service workers and corrections officers)
and corrections leaders, as well as doctors,
nutritionists, and dieticians who had worked in
correctional facilities or departments. To observe

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

prison food service ourselves, we visited ten
facilities in California, Washington, D.C., Maine,
Virginia, and Washington State. We were given
tours of these facilities that included the kitchen,
food operations, and other food-related areas.
While this varied from facility to facility, we were
sometimes allowed to ask questions of staff
and incarcerated people. These site visits and
interviews helped us better understand how
decisions are made, what motivates change, and
how policies translate to practice.

Cross-disciplinary literature review and
consultations
Our deep dive into the unique experience of
eating in prison was complemented by our study
of nutrition, the social and cultural role of food,
and the growing food justice and racial justice
movements. We began this project by assessing
the available data through a cross-disciplinary
literature review, analyzing information from
nutrition, mental health, public health, law,
economics, sociology, and cultural studies, as well
as looking at institutional eating in other sectors
and countries.
Additionally, we met and consulted with more than
50 people from different sectors and professions.
These include experts in new approaches to
nutrition; people and organizations running
innovative programs or operations centered
around food in prison, including Inside Out
Goodness, the Sustainability in Prisons Project,
and Quentin Cooks; and those working on broader
criminal justice reform, such as Worth Rises, The

135

Marshall Project, and the Prison Policy Initiative.
We also talked with chefs who are changing how
and what food is served in K-12 schools and
healthcare facilities.

Limitations
Over the past two years, we have been able to
compile the most comprehensive review of food
in U.S. prisons that exists to date. However, we
readily acknowledge that there is still much to
learn, and there are limitations within our data
as discussed below.
In our experience, prisons and correctional
departments are notoriously arcane when it
comes to sharing information, which presented
several barriers as we conducted our research.
One major impact was our limited ability to
solicit input directly from those incarcerated.
Conducting research or gathering data from
currently incarcerated people requires an
extensive research review process that is different
in each state. We understand that these practices
have been instituted due to the shameful history
of unethical research studies conducted on
incarcerated people; however, these processes
also contribute to prisons continuing operating
as opaque institutions. Due to these obstacles,
we were only able to interview individuals from
institutions that provided us formal permission.
As noted above, we conducted site visits at
facilities. However, it is important to acknowledge
that we believe the facilities we visited prepared

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y | E AT I N G B E H I N D B A R S

for our presence. During some of our visits, the
people incarcerated informed us immediately that
what we were viewing did not necessarily reflect
the norm. Everything we were shown during
the site visits was controlled by those operating
the facility and department. We appreciate the
agencies that allowed us into their facilities, since
many agencies we contacted would not speak with
us, let alone allow us inside a facility. We recognize
the limited vantage point of our observation due to
the somewhat contrived nature of the visit.
Our survey has limitations due to its size,
representation, and likely response bias. While
the survey was sent to dozens of organizations
across the country, the responses were
not demographically representative of the
reentering population. Nearly half of the

136

formerly incarcerated respondents identified as
female, although females are only 10% of the
incarcerated population. Additionally, more white
people and Native Americans responded than
are demographically represented in state prison
populations. It is also possible that our survey was
subject to response bias, meaning that people
who have strong feelings about their experience
with food in prison were probably more likely to
complete it, skewing the overall results. Given
these limitations, we do not attempt to generalize
our findings to the entire reentry or incarcerated
population. Throughout the report, we also do
not make statements regarding specific states or
demographics identified by respondents. Instead,
we share overall trends and the experiences of
those who responded.

----

IMPACT/.JusT/CE
Learn more at
impactjustice.org/impact/food-in-prison/#report